Mexican Citizenship Law Contradicts Anchor Baby Amnesty .

[High_Gravity]

Do American constitution over rule Mexican constitution over Mexican citizens?

If those Mexican citizens live in the US than YES, it does.

NO, the reason is Mexican Consulate's Department of Protection of to protect Mexican citizens.

Ok, but what does that really mean? if you are on American soil, you fall under American laws, not Mexico's.

 

[Sunshine]

Mexico Claims Anchor Babies by Law
By admin, on January 7th, 2011


While the United States engages in a faux struggle to comprehend the true intent of the 14th amendment, the Mexican Constitution is quite clear: Anchor babies belong to them no matter where they are born.

The argument of the open borders advocates is that anyone born on American soil instantly becomes an American citizen whether that birth occurred during a commission of a crime or not. In their world, a pregnant woman can cross into the United States illegally, give birth, and confer American citizenship on that child. If only that’s what the 14th amendment said. That’s not what it says at all

...............................
Take a good look at article II there. Those born in a foreign country, would only need one of the parents to be Mexican citizens to make that child a Mexican citizen, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof.

Mexico Claims Anchor Babies by Law « rjjrdq's America II

They can claim whatever they like but those children are American citizens whether you like it or not.

Anchor babies are also Mexican citizens also. Mexico have authroity over their citizens no matter where they are.
They are only American citizens by miss-interpretation of the 14th Amendment. IF ever the Supreme court rule on the issue it will be clarified. The Supreme Court has ruled only that the Constitution requires babies of legal immigrants be U.S. citizens.

A foreign country has 'authority' over someone in the US only to the extent that extradition treaties allow them to be brought back to that foreign country.

 

[Sunshine]

Do American constitution over rule Mexican constitution over Mexican citizens?

If those Mexican citizens live in the US than YES, it does.

NO, the reason is Mexican Consulate's Department of Protection to protect Mexican citizens.
And Mexican Embassy provide protection to Mexicans in the US.

You do not appear to understand what a consulate is or does.

Rather, the premises of diplomatic missions remain under the jurisdiction of the host state while being afforded special privileges (such as immunity from most local laws) by the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations. Diplomats themselves still retain full diplomatic immunity, and (as an adherent to the Vienna Convention) the host country may not enter the premises of the mission without permission of the represented country. The term "extraterritoriality," therefore, is often used in this broader sense when applied to diplomatic missions.

As the host country may not enter the representing country's embassy without permission, embassies are sometimes used by refugees escaping from either the host country or a third country. For example, North Korean nationals, who would be arrested and deported from China upon discovery, have sought sanctuary at various third-country embassies in China. Once inside the embassy, diplomatic channels can be used to solve the issue and send the refugees to another country. Notable violations of embassy extraterritoriality include the Iran hostage crisis (1979–1981) and the Japanese embassy hostage crisis at the ambassador's residence in Lima, Peru during 1996.

[edit] Role"The functions of a diplomatic mission consist, inter alia, in representing the sending State in the receiving State; protecting in the receiving State the interests of the sending State and of its nationals, within the limits permitted by international law; negotiating with the Government of the receiving State; ascertaining by all lawful means conditions and developments in the receiving State, and reporting thereon to the Government of the sending State; promoting friendly relations between the sending State and the receiving State, and developing their economic, cultural and scientific relations".[7]

Having a consulate in another country does not give immunity from the law to citizens of other countries.

 

[LilOlLady]

We can argue this issue back and forth but the fact remains that the intention of the 14th amendment do not apply to children born to illegal aliens. They are only American citizens because the Supreme count has never ruled on the issue. The 14th Amendment does not say that "anyone born on American soil is automatic an American citizen."
This article best explains it;

Original intent of the 14th Amendment
http://www.dailypaul.com/132657/original-intent-of-the-14th-amendment

 

[Sunshine]

We can argue this issue back and forth but the fact remains that the intention of the 14th amendment do not apply to children born to illegal aliens. They are only American citizens because the Supreme count has never ruled on the issue. The 14th Amendment does not say that "anyone born on American soil is automatic an American citizen."
This article best explains it;

Original intent of the 14th Amendment
Original intent of the 14th Amendment | Ron Paul 2012 | Peace . Gold . Liberty

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.

Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Now quote someone other than that idiot Ron Paul.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

Further, there is no such thing as ‘anchor baby amnesty,’ as first there’s no such thing as an ‘anchor baby,’ as those born in the US are citizens, and second illegal parents of citizens are subject to deportation as anyone else.

And that's what needs to be changed. That law was written hundreds of years ago when the fathers had zero idea of what was to come.

1868 isn't "hundreds of years ago", its 143 years ago, and the Founding Fathers were all dead by the time the 14th amendment was written you moron.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

We can argue this issue back and forth but the fact remains that the intention of the 14th amendment do not apply to children born to illegal aliens.

I don't think they even had "illegal aliens" in 1868, did they?

I'm pretty sure their intent was to make all persons born in the U.S. citizens of the U.S. - as that is exactly what they wrote. Are you suggesting the writers were idiots who could not properly express themselves?

 

[Sunshine]

Further, there is no such thing as ‘anchor baby amnesty,’ as first there’s no such thing as an ‘anchor baby,’ as those born in the US are citizens, and second illegal parents of citizens are subject to deportation as anyone else.

And that's what needs to be changed. That law was written hundreds of years ago when the fathers had zero idea of what was to come.

1868 isn't "hundreds of years ago", its 143 years ago, and the Founding Fathers were all dead by the time the 14th amendment was written you moron.

So there were no immigrants who bypassed the naturalization process in 1868. Groovy!

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

And that's what needs to be changed. That law was written hundreds of years ago when the fathers had zero idea of what was to come.

1868 isn't "hundreds of years ago", its 143 years ago, and the Founding Fathers were all dead by the time the 14th amendment was written you moron.

So there were no immigrants who bypassed the naturalization process in 1868. Groovy!

You don't have to naturalize to be a resident.

They didn't have green cards in 1868 I know that, and from what I can tell the first federal law passed restricting entry into this country didn't come till 1875.

The U.S. was far more sparsely populated back then.

Do you right wing fucks study history AT ALL?

 

[Sunshine]

1868 isn't "hundreds of years ago", its 143 years ago, and the Founding Fathers were all dead by the time the 14th amendment was written you moron.

So there were no immigrants who bypassed the naturalization process in 1868. Groovy!

You don't have to naturalize to be a resident.

They didn't have green cards in 1868 I know that, and from what I can tell the first federal law passed restricting entry into this country didn't come till 1875.

The U.S. was far more sparsely populated back then.

Do you right wing fucks study history AT ALL?

I have studied the law and it is clear that you have not.

 

[Againsheila]

There you have it! Anchor Babies are not U.S. citizens! They are citizens of Mexican according to the Mexican Constitution.

Wrong as usual – see below.

Mexico has its constitution; we have ours. Just because it's written in the Mexican constitution, it does not make it so in ours - but - I am for doing away with anchor babies. If they are born of illegal parents, then they should NOT be deemed U.S. citizens. Period!

Ignorant nonsense.

The 14th Amendment clearly confers citizenship upon any person born in the United States, regardless his parents’ citizenship or status:

A child born on American soil automatically gets U.S. citizenship, unless the child is born to a foreign government official who is in the United States as a recognized diplomat. Children born in certain U.S. territories -- Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, and Guam -- may also acquire U.S. citizenship. For details, see Title 8 of the U.S. Code, available at United States Code: Title 8,TITLE 8—ALIENS AND NATIONALITY | LII / Legal Information Institute.

U.S. Citizenship by Birth or Through Parents | Nolo.com

Further, there is no such thing as ‘anchor baby amnesty,’ as first there’s no such thing as an ‘anchor baby,’ as those born in the US are citizens, and second illegal parents of citizens are subject to deportation as anyone else.

Do you really think a law that clearly states that a child born to LEGAL diplomats is not a citizen was ever intended to confer citizenship on a child born to to illegal alien parents?

 

[Sunshine]

There you have it! Anchor Babies are not U.S. citizens! They are citizens of Mexican according to the Mexican Constitution.

Wrong as usual – see below.



Ignorant nonsense.

The 14th Amendment clearly confers citizenship upon any person born in the United States, regardless his parents’ citizenship or status:

A child born on American soil automatically gets U.S. citizenship, unless the child is born to a foreign government official who is in the United States as a recognized diplomat. Children born in certain U.S. territories -- Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, and Guam -- may also acquire U.S. citizenship. For details, see Title 8 of the U.S. Code, available at United States Code: Title 8,TITLE 8—ALIENS AND NATIONALITY | LII / Legal Information Institute.

U.S. Citizenship by Birth or Through Parents | Nolo.com

Further, there is no such thing as ‘anchor baby amnesty,’ as first there’s no such thing as an ‘anchor baby,’ as those born in the US are citizens, and second illegal parents of citizens are subject to deportation as anyone else.

Do you really think a law that clearly states that a child born to LEGAL diplomats is not a citizen was ever intended to confer citizenship on a child born to to illegal alien parents?

Where did you get your law degree? One of those things has nothing to do with the other.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

There you have it! Anchor Babies are not U.S. citizens! They are citizens of Mexican according to the Mexican Constitution.

Wrong as usual – see below.



Ignorant nonsense.

The 14th Amendment clearly confers citizenship upon any person born in the United States, regardless his parents’ citizenship or status:

A child born on American soil automatically gets U.S. citizenship, unless the child is born to a foreign government official who is in the United States as a recognized diplomat. Children born in certain U.S. territories -- Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, and Guam -- may also acquire U.S. citizenship. For details, see Title 8 of the U.S. Code, available at United States Code: Title 8,TITLE 8—ALIENS AND NATIONALITY | LII / Legal Information Institute.

U.S. Citizenship by Birth or Through Parents | Nolo.com

Further, there is no such thing as ‘anchor baby amnesty,’ as first there’s no such thing as an ‘anchor baby,’ as those born in the US are citizens, and second illegal parents of citizens are subject to deportation as anyone else.

Do you really think a law that clearly states that a child born to LEGAL diplomats is not a citizen was ever intended to confer citizenship on a child born to to illegal alien parents?

Citizenship to people born here to non-diplomats is guaranteed by the 14th amendment, there doesn't need to be a law stating such.

Although - you could just grant all illegal residents immunity from the law. Then they are not subject to our jurisdiction and their children would not be citizens. Of course, the tradeoff is that the worst thing we could do to punish them for crimes - even murder and espionage - would be to send them back to their home country.