Do you Support a Constitutional Amendment to Forbid Birthright Citizenship to Children of Illegals?

[Publius1787]

Do you Support a Constitutional Amendment to Forbid Birthright Citizenship to Children of Illegals?

 

[eagle1462010]

Absolutely...................

Only two developed nations in the world still use this. The United States and Canada..........All other developed countries have gotten rid of it and rightfully so.................

 

[Politico]

No there are actually about 10. And with the exception of one or two they are the only ones having an illegal problem. That in itself speaks against having such a policy.

 

[eagle1462010]

No there are actually about 10. And with the exception of one or two they are the only ones having an illegal problem. That in itself speaks against having such a policy.

Developed Nations.............The other 8 are not considered developed.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Do you Support a Constitutional Amendment to Forbid Birthright Citizenship to Children of Illegals?

This is ignorant and makes no sense.

The 14th Amendment would first need to be repealed, which would be unmitigated insanity. The 14th Amendment acknowledges the fundamental rights of all persons in the United States, it safeguards those rights from capricious majorities hostile to minority classes of persons, and prohibits politicians and bureaucrats from deciding who is or is not a citizen motivated by purely partisan reasons.

We do not want politicians and bureaucrats deciding who will or will not have his civil liberties.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Absolutely...................

Only two developed nations in the world still use this. The United States and Canada..........All other developed countries have gotten rid of it and rightfully so.................

And this is an example of the ignorance and hate the 14th Amendment guards against.

 

[Publius1787]

Do you Support a Constitutional Amendment to Forbid Birthright Citizenship to Children of Illegals?

This is ignorant and makes no sense.

The 14th Amendment would first need to be repealed, which would be unmitigated insanity. The 14th Amendment acknowledges the fundamental rights of all persons in the United States, it safeguards those rights from capricious majorities hostile to minority classes of persons, and prohibits politicians and bureaucrats from deciding who is or is not a citizen motivated by purely partisan reasons.

We do not want politicians and bureaucrats deciding who will or will not have his civil liberties.

You would not need to repeal the entire 14th Amendment. You would only need to repeal the section of the 14th Amendment that 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 wherein they reside." and replace it with "All persons naturalized or born to citizens in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside."

The only people who wouldn't support such a measure are those who want a flood of poor uneducated reliable democrat voters sucking off of the teet of the honest American taxpayer and screwing other migrants who are waiting for their chance.

 

[eagle1462010]

Do you Support a Constitutional Amendment to Forbid Birthright Citizenship to Children of Illegals?

This is ignorant and makes no sense.

The 14th Amendment would first need to be repealed, which would be unmitigated insanity. The 14th Amendment acknowledges the fundamental rights of all persons in the United States, it safeguards those rights from capricious majorities hostile to minority classes of persons, and prohibits politicians and bureaucrats from deciding who is or is not a citizen motivated by purely partisan reasons.

We do not want politicians and bureaucrats deciding who will or will not have his civil liberties.

It would basically amend the 14th............most of the world has rejected that 2 immigrants of different nationalities having a baby in their country should not constitute citizenship. The parents not being citizens.............it is a policy that is being abused and that is why countries in Europe and A

Absolutely...................

Only two developed nations in the world still use this. The United States and Canada..........All other developed countries have gotten rid of it and rightfully so.................

And this is an example of the ignorance and hate the 14th Amendment guards against.

Baloney.............It is the right under the constitution to amend laws that are being abuses as it is being abused now.

It's not about hate..........it's about reforming our immigration policies to reject a clause that is being abused.............and RATIONAL Nations around the world have rejected this policy.

 

[Politico]

No there are actually about 10. And with the exception of one or two they are the only ones having an illegal problem. That in itself speaks against having such a policy.

Developed Nations.............The other 8 are not considered developed.

Yeah yeah we get it. America fuck yeah!. The point remains the same.

 

[Skull Pilot]

If at least one of the parents is not a citizen then their children should not be.

 

[Publius1787]

If at least one of the parents is not a citizen then their children should not be.

Important distinction. But I would grant citizenship to those who have at least one citizen parent. Of course, if they're not married I would deport the alien and make them go through what every other family must to get their spouse to this country. With an extra penalty of course.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Such an 'amendment' would be repugnant to our fundamental tenets of law and justice where children are not subject to punitive measures as a consequence of their parents' bad acts.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Do you Support a Constitutional Amendment to Forbid Birthright Citizenship to Children of Illegals?

You would not need to repeal the entire 14th Amendment. You would only need to repeal the section of the 14th Amendment that 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 wherein they reside." and replace it with "All persons naturalized or born to citizens in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside."

Interesting can of worms you are opening up. In essence the 14th Amendment clearly establishes that citizenship and the inherent rights associated with citizenship are bestowed at birth as opposed to conception. But that is for another thread.

If you attempt to draw a distinction by alleging that only those "born to citizens" are eligible then you are violating the basic concept of birthrights. If you can deny citizenship as a birthright then what else can you deny? That children are not entitled to an education either? How would that work out in 20 years when you have a generation of illiterates who cannot find employment? What do you imagine they are going to do instead? Are you going to deport these children? To where? They are not citizens of any other nation so you cannot "send them back" to some country that has no record of their birth.

You need to think through the consequences of your proposal if you want anyone to take it seriously.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

No.

If being born here doesn't make you American any more many of us are in trouble since some of our ancestors would be disqualified if it were grandfathered in.

 

[Oldglory1]

No.

If being born here doesn't make you American any more many of us are in trouble since some of our ancestors would be disqualified if it were grandfathered in.

WTH are you talking about? Most American's ancestors were born here. Most countries do not allow children oF illegal alien parents to be birthright citizens. and rightly so!

 

[WorldWatcher]

>

Yes.

Oh you don't have to repeal the 14th amendment, the only thing that needs to happen is to clarify what "subject to the jurisdiction" means. If you are here legally (whether visa, workers permit, green card, etc.) or the child born here of an existing citizen you are by birth a citizen. On the other hand if you are here as a diplomatic representative of a foreign power or have no legal status to be in this country, then a child born is not a citizen.


>>>>

 

[Oldglory1]

Such an 'amendment' would be repugnant to our fundamental tenets of law and justice where children are not subject to punitive measures as a consequence of their parents' bad acts.

That has nothing to do with it. You act like it would be punishment for kids to inherit the citizenship of their parents. Birthright citizenship for kids born to illegal aliens was never meant to bestowed on them by the writers of the 14th Amendment.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

No.

If being born here doesn't make you American any more many of us are in trouble since some of our ancestors would be disqualified if it were grandfathered in.

WTH are you talking about? Most American's ancestors were born here. Most countries do not allow children oF illegal alien parents to be birthright citizens. and rightly so!

"Unfortunately, the only rule one can apply to all U.S. naturalization records--certainly all those prior to September 1906--is that there was no rule.(1)

There were certain legal and social provisions, however, governing which women did and did not go to court to naturalize. In general, immigrant women have always had the right to become U.S. citizens, but not every court honored that right. Since the mid-nineteenth century a succession of laws worked to keep certain women out of naturalization records, either by granting them derivative citizenship or barring their naturalization altogether. It is this variety of laws covering the history of women's naturalization, as well as different courts' varying interpretation of those laws, that help explain whether a naturalization record exists for any given immigrant woman.

While original U.S. nationality legislation of 1790, 1795, and 1802 limited naturalization eligibility to "free white persons," it did not limit eligibility by sex. But as early as 1804 the law began to draw distinctions regarding married women in naturalization law. Since that date, and until 1934, when a man filed a declaration of intention to become a citizen but died prior to naturalization, his widow and minor children were "considered as citizens of the United States" if they/she appeared in court and took the oath of allegiance and renunciation.(2) Thus, among naturalization court records, one could find a record of a woman taking the oath, but find no corresponding declaration for her, and perhaps no petition. "
Prologue Selected Articles

Consequently, without 'being born here makes you a citizen' some of us could be technically illegal because an ancestor woman wasn't considered legal.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Such an 'amendment' would be repugnant to our fundamental tenets of law and justice where children are not subject to punitive measures as a consequence of their parents' bad acts.

It is not a punishment to deny citizenship to the children of non-citizens.

 

[MrDVS1]

Do you Support a Constitutional Amendment to Forbid Birthright Citizenship to Children of Illegals?

I'd rather support an amendment to forbid birthright citizenship to all and any non-citizens.