Anchor Babies

Discussion in 'Immigration/Illegal Immigration' started by Stephanie, May 5, 2006.

  1. Stephanie
    Offline

    Stephanie Diamond Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2004
    Messages:
    70,236
    Thanks Received:
    10,818
    Trophy Points:
    2,040
    Ratings:
    +27,360
    By: CongressmanMacCollins · Section: Diaries


    Dealing with Anchor Babies
    By Congressman Mac Collins (Ret. R-GA)
    Each year the United States grants citizenship to a quarter of a million children of illegal aliens. There is a common misconception among the public that such citizenship is a constitutional guarantee. The fact is that the constitutional question of whether the 14th amendment grants citizenship to children of foreigners born on U.S. soil was addressed by the Supreme Court over 100 years ago in the Slaughter House Cases and, again, in 1971 in the case of Rogers v. Belle . All existing case law confirms that the Fourteenth Amendment does not automatically grant citizenship to the children of illegal immigrants. The reality is that it was Congress, through immigration legislation, which created this prize of citizenship for the children of people who violate our laws by entering our country illegally. Between 1997 and 2001, the unfortunate byproduct of our current immigration code has been a cost to the tax payers of the United States of billions of dollars to support these children who are popularly known as "anchor babies". They are named so because their legal status ties their illegal parents to the United States. During this time period, U.S. taxpayers have spent more than 4 billion dollars just to provide Medicaid to these children whose parents do not even pay into the system. Medicaid coverage, free education, and protection from deportation for the parents of "anchor babies" are a primary draw for many people to enter this country illegally. The time has come for our Congress to side with the majority of U.S. citizens and heed the calls for real immigration reform by repealing the INS legislation that makes the United States such an attractive residential destination for illegal aliens and their families.

    A good place to begin would be to follow the example of the majority of Latin American countries and stop granting citizenship to the children of those who come into our nation illegally. Congressman Nathan Deal of Georgia has proposed long overdue legislation, in the form of H.R. 698, which will once and for all rectify this flaw in our current immigration laws. Mr. Deal's legislation would simply remove the costly reward of citizenship for those whose parents have come here illegally. The time has come for the Congress and the administration to support this important legislation. As of the writing of this article only about 80 of my former colleagues in the House of Representatives have signed on as co-sponsors of Mr. Deal's legislation. By ignoring immigration reform members of Congress can avoid addressing this politically sensitive question during an election year however, by doing so they are putting their personal political interests above the needs of the citizens they are elected to represent.

    Inaction on Capitol Hill has left our nation's borders tragically vulnerable, five years post-September 11th and forced the American taxpayer to continue to pay the bill for the cost of illegal immigration. The elimination of the "anchor baby" loophole in our immigration laws should be addressed immediately by Congress- and repealed.

    The time to start implementing this reform is now, with the elimination of "anchor babies" and the privileges it unwittingly bestows upon illegal aliens who parent for profit. If Congress is truly concerned about reform, and the proof will come in the form of action not tedious speechifying, it can start by supporting House Resolution 698 this session. This is the critical first step in restoring the sovereignty of our Southern Border.

    Mac Collins is a former Republican member of the United States House of Representative. Congressman Collins served 12 years in Congress, and in the Republican leadership of the House as a member of the Republican Steering Committee, and as Deputy Majority Whip. He was also a member of the Ways and Means Committee and the Intelligence Committee.

    Footnotes:

    http://www.theamericanresistance.com/issues/anchor_babies.html
    "Over a century ago, the Supreme Court correctly confirmed this restricted interpretation of citizenship in the so-called 'Slaughter-House cases' [83 US 36 (1873)] and in [112 US 94 (1884)]. In Elk v. Wilkins, the phrase 'subject to its jurisdiction' excluded from its operation 'children of ministers, consuls, and citizens of foreign states born within the United States.' In Elk, the American Indian claimant was considered not an American citizen because the law required him to be 'not merely subject in some respect or degree to the jurisdiction of the United States, but completely subject to their political jurisdiction and owing them direct and immediate allegiance.'

    Congress subsequently passed a special act to grant full citizenship to American Indians, who were not citizens even through they were born within the borders of the United States."

    http://www.thenewamerican.com/artman/publish/article_2447.shtml

    The New Amnerican
    A Bold Remedy to a Grave Threat
    by George Detweiler
    October 31, 2005 Issue

    "Congress Has the Power:

    It is noteworthy that the Supreme Court affirmed the power of Congress to define terms used in the 14th Amendment in the case of Rogers v. Bellei (1971):

    The place of birth governs citizenship, except as modified by statute.

    The first sentence of the Fourteenth Amendment was declaratory of existing law, so far as the qualifications of being born in the United States, being naturalized in the United States, and being subject to its jurisdiction are concerned. [Emphasis added.]

    H.R. 698 extends citizenship to children born in the United States of alien parents only if born in wedlock when either parent is a citizen or permanent resident alien who maintains a residence here, or to children born out of wedlock if the mother is a citizen or permanent resident alien who maintains a residence here. It also declares that it applies only to children born after the effective date of the act."

    Mac Collins' Wedsites:
    http://www.collinsforcongress.com
    http://congressmanmaccollins.blogspot.com
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  2. WhatTheHell2
    Offline

    WhatTheHell2 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2008
    Messages:
    61
    Thanks Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    6
    Ratings:
    +4
    You are right but how do we get it correctely interpreted and enforced?
     
  3. sky dancer
    Online

    sky dancer Guest

    Ratings:
    +0
    America has always had better instincts. Immigrants have succeeded in this country more than any other because we focus as a country on welcoming immigrants and making them in to new Americans, not just barely tolerated foreigners. Their children are not second class citizens and just as American as the children of those who trace their roots to Plymouth Rock.

    http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2007/07/anchor-babies--.html
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 2, 2008
  4. catzmeow
    Offline

    catzmeow BANNED

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2008
    Messages:
    24,064
    Thanks Received:
    2,922
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Gunshine State
    Ratings:
    +2,974
    I agree that we need to address this situation, but I hold little hope that the current administration or the Obama administration will do so. They are too busy pandering to the Hispanic vote.
     
  5. William Joyce
    Offline

    William Joyce Chemotherapy for PC

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2004
    Messages:
    9,693
    Thanks Received:
    1,135
    Trophy Points:
    190
    Location:
    Caucasiastan
    Ratings:
    +1,349
    Hey, dumbshit... we're gonna send 'em all to YOUR house!
     
  6. PoliticalChic
    Offline

    PoliticalChic Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2008
    Messages:
    55,927
    Thanks Received:
    15,706
    Trophy Points:
    2,190
    Location:
    Brooklyn, NY
    Ratings:
    +25,070
    The 14th Amendment, section 1 states:

    "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 in which they reside."

    I don't understand how this can be misinterpreted.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  7. Walt
    Offline

    Walt Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2008
    Messages:
    148
    Thanks Received:
    14
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    Joliet IL.
    Ratings:
    +14


    I could mot agree more. How can this be mis-interperted?


    The 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution reads in part:

    "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and the State wherein they reside."

    Babies born to illegal alien mothers within U.S. borders are called anchor babies because under the 1965 immigration Act, they act as an anchor that pulls the illegal alien mother and eventually a host of other relatives into permanent U.S. residency. (Jackpot babies is another term).

    The 14th Amendment was ratified in 1868 to protect the rights of native-born Black Americans, whose rights were being denied as recently-freed slaves. In 1866, Senator Jacob Howard clearly spelled out the intent of the 14th Amendment by writing:

    "Every person born within the limits of the United States, and subject to their jurisdiction, is by virtue of natural law and national law a citizen of the United States. This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the Government of the United States, but will include every other class of persons. It settles the great question of citizenship and removes all doubt as to what persons are or are not citizens of the United States. This has long been a great desideratum in the jurisprudence and legislation of this country."

    The original intent of the 14th Amendment was clearly not to facilitate illegal aliens defying U.S. law at taxpayer expense. Current estimates indicate there may be over 300,000 anchor babies born each year in the U.S., thus causing illegal alien mothers to add more to the U.S. population each year than immigration from all sources in an average year before 1965.

    The correct interpretation of the 14th Amendment is that an illegal alien mother is subject to the jurisdiction of her native country, as is her baby.

    Over a century ago, the Supreme Court correctly confirmed this restricted interpretation of citizenship in the so-called 'Slaughter-House cases' [83 US 36 (1873)] and in [112 US 94 (1884)]. In Elk v.Wilkins, the phrase 'subject to its jurisdiction' excluded from its operation 'children of ministers, consuls, and citizens of foreign states born within the United States.' In Elk, the American Indian claimant was considered not an American citizen because the law required him to be 'not merely subject in some respect or degree to the jurisdiction of the United States, but completely subject to their political jurisdiction and owing them direct and immediate allegiance.'

    Congress subsequently passed a special act to grant full citizenship to American Indians, who were not citizens even through they were born within the borders of the United States. The Citizens Act of 1924, codified in 8USCSß1401, provides that:

    The following shall be nationals and citizens of the United States at birth:
    (a) a person born in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof;
    (b) a person born in the United States to a member of an Indian, Eskimo, Aleutian, or other aboriginal tribe.

    American citizens must be wary of elected politicians voting to illegally extend our generous social benefits to illegal aliens and other criminals.

    Anchor babies - children born in the United States to illegal alien mothers - THE AMERICAN RESISTANCE FOUNDATION

    The 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution - Fourteenth Amendment - anchor babies and birthright citizenship - interpretations and misinterpretations - US Constitution
     
  8. jillian
    Offline

    jillian Princess Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2006
    Messages:
    69,560
    Thanks Received:
    13,013
    Trophy Points:
    2,220
    Location:
    The Other Side of Paradise
    Ratings:
    +22,439
    No. That isn't correct.

    You have an awful lot of words in your post. Do you understand any of them? (Speaking of which, you need to put quotes in quotes and link directly to whereeever you got them from or they will be deleted. Thanks).

    Do you know anything about the issue before the Court in Elk?

    And can you perhaps understand why the issues before the Court in Elk are not relevant to the issue of citizenship of a child born in this country.... regardless of the perjorative labels you give to such a child.

    Here's a link to the actual case.

    http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=112&invol=94
     
  9. Walt
    Offline

    Walt Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2008
    Messages:
    148
    Thanks Received:
    14
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    Joliet IL.
    Ratings:
    +14


    Yes that is correct. At least until the 1965 Immigration Act as it stated. Since the 65 immigration act did not change the Constitution, I will listen to the ones that passed the 14th for the interpertation of it.The links were on the bottom of the article. If the parents are not citizens {under the jurisdiction thereof}, then neither are the children. The following is from Elks.

     
  10. Wolfmoon
    Offline

    Wolfmoon U B U & I'll B Me 4 USA!

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2009
    Messages:
    2,520
    Thanks Received:
    130
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    PROUD, USA
    Ratings:
    +146
    IMO, Children of illegal aliens should be illegal aliens. Two illegal parents = an illegal child.

    Why make Anchor Babies legal when they hate America, Americans and our way of life. Plus they drain the social services dry, commit crimes and have more welfare babies, for us to pay for. To Hell with that!
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1

Share This Page