illegals - Constitutional protection?

[zzzz]

The hot question today is the 14th Amendment and the right of illegal’s born in the US being afforded citizenship. But a bigger question is “Does the US Constitution confer illegal’s with rights and protections guaranteed to US citizens?” Or are illegal’s beyond the scope of the Constitution and other than criminal protection have no other standing?

It all comes down to the interpretation by the Supreme Court of this phrase in the US Constitution: "subject to the jurisdiction thereof". It is my belief that except in criminal actions that illegal’s are not entitled to the rights and protections specified in the Constitution for US citizens. And furthermore illegal’s should not be entitled to any governmental assistance by state or federal governments.

As to enforcing laws on the books, it is the federal government’s responsibility to regulate immigration and naturalization. We are a nation of laws and when people become public officials, join the military, or other agencies they must take an oath to uphold the laws of the land. This does not mean they can pick and choose, they swore an oath to uphold the laws. Failure to uphold these laws is a violation of their oaths and they should be terminated from their position if they do not want to abide by the law.

 

[Angelhair]

THE RULE OF LAW is what makes our country different from the rest. When this rule is not followed, our country becomes just like any other country on this planet. If those who have sworn to uphold our laws refuse to do it, then it is suggested that they no longer should be part of it. The answer to the illegal problem is at the border - this government should move mountains to stop the flow of illegals from entering the USA! Period!!!

 

[LuckyDan]

The brilliant and beautiful Ann Coulter wrote a helpful column on this topic recently:

The amendment guaranteed that freed slaves would have all the privileges of citizenship by providing: "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."

The drafters of the 14th amendment had no intention of conferring citizenship on the children of aliens who happened to be born in the U.S. (For my younger readers, back in those days, people cleaned their own houses and raised their own kids.)

The very author of the citizenship clause, Sen. Jacob Howard of Michigan, expressly said: "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."

And then, out of the blue in 1982, Justice Brennan slipped a footnote into his 5-4 opinion in Plyler v. Doe, asserting that "no plausible distinction with respect to Fourteenth Amendment 'jurisdiction' can be drawn between resident aliens whose entry into the United States was lawful, and resident aliens whose entry was unlawful." (Other than the part about one being lawful and the other not.)

Justice Brennan's Footnote Gave Us Anchor Babies - HUMAN EVENTS