Posted on 05/29/2002 2:42:12 PM PDT by Tailgunner Joe
The 2000 Census revealed that, in at least 13 States surveyed to date, more US residents are speaking Spanish at home. Not English. This is the result of nations growing Hispanic population throughout the 1990s. It has risen an astonishing 58 percent to 35.3 million.
In some places such as California, native-born English-speaking business owners are taking Spanish lessons or hiring bilingual employees. Speaking Spanish at home is fine with me, but taking it out to the larger community and, in effect, requiring that it too speak Spanish is just dead wrong. A common language binds Americans to one another. Two languages in the same nation creates two separate communities.
The flow of illegal aliens from Mexico and nations further south is a virtual torrent. In the first six months of this year, the US Border Patrol apprehended 176,655 illegal aliens in just the 21-mile Douglas, Arizona, section alone! The same individual may be apprehended more than once and the Border Patrol estimates that, for every one that is caught, three to five are not! Since 1983, at least a half-million illegal aliens have entered the US from our southern border.
A study by the non-profit Center for Immigration Studies confirms that "annual immigration in 2030 will still approach 400,000 a year, 8.3 to 11.4 percent higher than the 370,000 estimated for 2000." The Mexican-born population of the United States will double to 18 million by the year 2030. There is a powerful incentive for this because, in the last decade, Mexican immigrants sent more than $45 billion to their relatives. In 2000, they sent $6 billion or about $17 million a day!
Federal investigators recently revealed that "tens of thousands of foreigners are illegally obtaining Social Security numbers by using fake documents involving identity theft and other crimes. Federal officials have not yet found a way to search US immigration records to prevent the practice. Using the Social Security identification, the next step is to secure credit cards and even security clearances that permit illegal aliens to work in sensitive areas such as airports. In 200l, the Social Security Administration issued 5.8 million numbers, including 1.5 million to non-citizens.
On May 5th, both the Washington Post and Washington Times reported that the families of eleven illegal immigrants who died while attempting to enter the United States had filed a $41 million lawsuit against two federal agencies. Allow me to provide my standard disclaimer. I do not dislike Mexicans. I dont even know a Mexican. If a Mexican has come here legally and become an American citizen, bravo! I have no problem with that, but the notion that the United States should be sued because it did not tend to the needs of those entering illegally is just nuts!
According to them, the failure of the United States, specifically the Department of Interior and the US Fish and Wildlife Service, to provide water to Mexicans trying to sneak into America, was the reason they died. Their bodies were found last year in the Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge between Tucson and Yuma. That area was being used because, say the attorneys for the families, the US Border Patrol has effectively shut down more populous portions of the Arizona border, thereby forcing illegal aliens to come in through more remote areas.
Well, it should be obvious that the US is to blame, right? Why should we stop at providing water in a desolate desert where ground temperatures can exceed 130 degrees in the summer? Why not a fulltime bus service? Or chauffeured limousines? This Mexican version of an Alice in Wonderland approach to illegal immigration is why, in 1997, according to the Immigration and Naturalization Service, 54% of all illegal immigrants coming into the US were Mexicans.
Could this be because elements of the Mexican government are carrying out a strategic depopulation program, centered around approximately ninety communities in central and southern Mexico? Some informed sources believe this to be the case. Making matters worse, according to Rep. Tom Tancredo (CO-R), since 1996 there have been 118 incursions across the border into the US; 61 by Mexican military and 57 by Mexican law enforcement. At least 60% of the time, the Mexicans were armed. Sometimes US Border guards come under fire.
The INS estimates that, in the past three years, more than a thousand migrants have died of various causes trying to enter the United States illegally. Their deaths, each one of them, were a tragedy, but it seems to me that it is a greater tragedy that Mexico does nothing to stem this human traffic. Maybe if Mexico took steps to improve its economy and provide jobs for its people, they would be working in Mexico instead of sneaking across the border?
And maybe President Bushs enthusiastic support for yet another amnesty program for illegal aliens is one of the dumbest ideas hes ever had? We are talking about adding another 200,000 illegal Mexican immigrants to the population. Thats equivalent to adding a city the size of Baton Rouge, Bakersfield or Mobile. All this does is say to Mexicans that, if they can get into the US, they have a fair chance of going to the head of the line when the next amnesty comes. No need to apply for citizenship like others do. No need to come here, get a Green Card, and earn the right to be a citizen. Just sneak across the border.
Our immigration policies are so stupid that the House Judiciary Committee recently voted out Rep. Barney Franks HR 1452, misnamed the Family Reunion Act, but in fact is legislation that would permit foreign criminals to stay in this country! It has 52 sponsors, most of whom are from the far Left of the Democrat Party, but that is not a long distance to traverse. The bill would erase the reforms achieved in the landmark 1996 immigration law requiring that, after serving their prison sentence here, they get deported.
This is why, at current rates, between legal and illegal immigration into this nation, we will double our population within the lifetimes of todays college students.
In the last decade, the 11.2 million immigrants who arrived, plus the 6.4 million children born to immigrants living here, equaled almost 70% of the nations population growth. Thats just flat-out too much, too fast.
Tortoise disquises?
LOL!
After the first few dozen tumble, the other invaders will get the hint.
The biggest cruise ships only hold 4,500 passengers.
Maybe 3 million surfboards? LOL
They'll take a boat ride and go around it. They'll bribe soldiers to look the other way for a while. They'll stage multiple diversions along the wall. They'll have their associates inside the US stage diversions. They will destroy or steal sensor elements.
Sorry, Jethro, but you are not thinking this thing through in nearly enough depth.
The last time I looked it was land locked, save for a small section of the Pacific ocean.
Try again....
And those estimates are the most hysterical of all. If that was the case, then the "8 to 11 million" figure y'all love to cite should be closer to 30 million.
The biggest cruise ships only hold 4,500 passengers.
In rather high luxury and low density.
Are you saying that the boats could only make ONE trip in a year? One relatively small boat, ten illegals each trip, one week per trip. Congrats, that's 520 a year, from ONE boat. There's probably at least a few hundred small boats in Mexican ports. Ten illegals could also be put in one shipping container. How many shipping containers come through American ports? How many get opened?
We don't have too abide by the false interpretation of the 14th Amendment that allows children born to non-citizens on American soil to be considered American citizens. Especially not on that 100 yards of American soil.
You need to give this some serious thought.
You're either ceding the land to Mexico, or you're creating the mother of all anchor baby nightmares.
We don't have too abide by the false interpretation of the 14th Amendment that allows children born to non-citizens on American soil to be considered American citizens. Especially not on that 100 yards of American soil.
Sorry. The wording of the 14th Amendment was very specific, and the Supreme Court does not agree with your interpretation.
You need to give this some serious thought.
I already have. You're either going to cede the land to Mexico, (which will in turn bring into question the Gadsden Purchase and the Treaty of Guadalupe-Hidalgo--and you do NOT want to do that), or you're going to have to write a Constitutional Amendment AND get 38 states to ratify it.
(1868)
Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside.
...and of the state wherein they reside.
This was, clearly, never meant to be 'The Anchor Baby Amendment'. This was meant to apply to LEGAL IMMIGRANTS to this country that had been granted residency in a state.
If a woman walks past the signs that say U.S. Border and under the wire and fences already there, then lays down on a blanket and has a baby, that doesn't make her a LEGAL resident of any state. This Amendment doesn't apply to her and her baby.
This is more liberal 'flim-flam'.
Put it in front of the Supreme Court, now. A majority will decide against this 'Anchor Baby' nonsense.
LOL
And thus the origin of "The Anchor Baby" problem.
This was, clearly, never meant to be 'The Anchor Baby Amendment'.
You're going to have to offer more proof than a bare assertion. Perhaps you can post the relevant statements of legislative intent--say, the statements of the drafters of the 14th Amendment?
This was meant to apply to LEGAL IMMIGRANTS to this country that had been granted residency in a state.
And those persons BORN here.
If a woman walks past the signs that say U.S. Border and under the wire and fences already there, then lays down on a blanket and has a baby, that doesn't make her a LEGAL resident of any state. This Amendment doesn't apply to her and her baby.
Sorry, kiddo--it applies to the baby, and by extension to the mother, unless you care to establish lots of orphanages.. The baby was born within the territory of the United States, and is subject to the jurisdiction of the United States--the baby is a US citizen.
This is more liberal 'flim-flam'.
Nope. Section 1 of the 14th Amendment is the only part that is relatively easy to understand.
Put it in front of the Supreme Court, now. A majority will decide against this 'Anchor Baby' nonsense.
Let's see, we have Stevens, Breyer, Bader-Ginsburg, and David Souter on the liberal side. We have Rehnquist who bounces either way. O'Connor is a little liberal, but she isn't the sort to make stuff up out of whole cloth, she'll probably go with the language of the 14th as written. Scalia and Thomas will also
We have here a case where the liberals will like the outcome, and the conservatives will be forced to hold their nose and vote with the liberals because of the plain language of the 14th Amendment. My estimate: with the current court, it will go 9-0 against you, with several opinions ranging from Breyer and Bader-Ginsburg waxing eloquent about slavery, and Scalia and Thomas saying "look, if you didn't want it to SAY that, then you shouldn't have WRITTEN and PASSED that."
Be careful what you ask for. You may very well get it.
BTW, this is why Constitutional Amendments need to be written VERY carefully. We have a time bomb waiting inside the 25th Amendment because of similarly poor writing.
The word 'and' in legal documents means AND, not OR. "...and of the state wherein they reside.", no LEGAL RESIDENCY, no citizenship.
Your take on the Supreme Court's view is academic, though. What do we lose by running it past them to see if you've guessed correctly? Nothing, the ILLEGAL ALIENS are already getting away with this liberal 'flim-flam'.
I, myself, don't believe this 'Anchor Baby' scam will pass the majority's scrutiny.
I believe that the majority of the Supreme Court will find it unfair that someone can use a scam like this to leapfrog ahead of others that have abided by our laws and waited in line for years for a chance to immigrate, LEGALLY.
A variant (and not much of one) of that argument was tried in the South during the latter 1870s, after Reconstruction ended; it was shot down, and Mr. Crow had to find another way to go about his business. I'll go look up the specific case. The issue is not the clarity of the language; it's not FUZZY enough to support your view.
Your take on the Supreme Court's view is academic, though. What do we lose by running it past them to see if you've guessed correctly? Nothing, the ILLEGAL ALIENS are already getting away with this liberal 'flim-flam'.
Except that you've wasted valuable time that SHOULD have been spent on fixing the anchor baby issue the only way it CAN be fixed--by Constitutional amendment. You will also have made a great fool of yourself, and allowed yourself to be painted as a crackpot ignoramus.
I, myself, don't believe this 'Anchor Baby' scam will pass the majority's scrutiny.
I, myself, having actually read some of the various Supreme Court decisions, do not agree with you, for the reasons already stated. Stare decisis is a big stumbling block here.
I believe that the majority of the Supreme Court will find it unfair that someone can use a scam like this to leapfrog ahead of others that have abided by our laws and waited in line for years for a chance to immigrate, LEGALLY.
Which ones? Breyer, Stevens, Souter, and Bader-Ginsburg are a solid block of four. Two of the remaining five will likely vote with them, because of the plain language of the text and stare decisis, and will not be swayed by arguments of "fairness" (life, after all, is not fair, and Judge Thomas could probably talk your ear off on that subject after the Anita Hill mess) not grounded in Constitutional law.
All persons born or naturalized in the United States are citizens of the United States.
not this:
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside.
All of those words, you want to pretend aren't there, mean something. Don't you think? Otherwise, why are they there? Hmmm?
And please allow me to submit that if we can't stop the flood of illegals breaking into America, our armed forces have no business searching caves in Afghanistan for bearded goat humpers...
Now, go away and don't come back until your willing to become a real American and help with the defense of our country.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.