Next... Anchor Babies.

[kellyjack]

We need an anchor baby law. Just because someone illegally sneaks over the border should'nt make their new born a citizen. Hell, Maybe they will pass a law that says that if they have the baby on your property they are now part of your family.

 

[ConHog]

The USA is the only country that allows those born of illegal parents to be considered U.S. citizens.....what is wrong with this picture?

We are bleeding heart idiots.

Why would England, or example, consider a baby born in England to be an American??

In actuality most European nations do in fact give citizenship to so called anchor babies. Although admittedly no European nations have the problem we have. Kinda hard to swim the Channel to have a baby and all that.

 

[tsalkonocii]

If they came to earn an honest living, they'd come here honestly. That they come here the dishonest way makes any claim they they're trying to be honest laughable.

They spit on our sovereignty and make it clear that have absolutely no respect for or intent to follow our laws.

Shoot them as they hop the fence.

Come here legally or be shot. It's that simple.

 

[Bullfighter]

Mexicans using their babies to fleece the US out of money should do time for child abuse!

 

[LuckyDan]

Mexicans using their babies to fleece the US out of money should do time for child abuse!

No! Since their kids were born here, they should get to be on "The Price Is Right."

 

[chanel]

The USA is the only country that allows those born of illegal parents to be considered U.S. citizens.....what is wrong with this picture?

We are bleeding heart idiots.

Why would England, or example, consider a baby born in England to be an American??

In actuality most European nations do in fact give citizenship to so called anchor babies. Although admittedly no European nations have the problem we have. Kinda hard to swim the Channel to have a baby and all that.

Wrong. NO European nation grants birth right citizenship. Ireland was the only one and they just abolished it.

With tallying completed in all 34 counting centres, 79.17% of voters wanted to end the automatic citizenship right for all babies born in Ireland.

The government said change was needed because foreign women were travelling to Ireland to give birth in order to get an EU passport for their babies.

Ireland has been the only EU country to grant such a right.

BBC NEWS | Europe | Ireland votes to end birth right

What an incentive to break the law. Who can argue that wanting a better life for your children is a bad thing?

End that; and the illegals will leave and others won't come Pretty simple plan.

 

[ConHog]

We are bleeding heart idiots.

Why would England, or example, consider a baby born in England to be an American??

In actuality most European nations do in fact give citizenship to so called anchor babies. Although admittedly no European nations have the problem we have. Kinda hard to swim the Channel to have a baby and all that.

Wrong. NO European nation grants birth right citizenship. Ireland was the only one and they just abolished it.

With tallying completed in all 34 counting centres, 79.17% of voters wanted to end the automatic citizenship right for all babies born in Ireland.

The government said change was needed because foreign women were travelling to Ireland to give birth in order to get an EU passport for their babies.

Ireland has been the only EU country to grant such a right.

BBC NEWS | Europe | Ireland votes to end birth right

What an incentive to break the law. Who can argue that wanting a better life for your children is a bad thing?

End that; and the illegals will leave and others won't come Pretty simple plan.

I am pro ending the loophole, it will require a CON amendment though.

 

[chanel]

Yes. George Will wrote an excellent piece on it.;

To end the practice of "birthright citizenship," all that is required is to correct the misinterpretation of that amendment's first sentence: "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."

Writing in the Texas Review of Law and Politics, Graglia says this irrationality is rooted in a misunderstanding of the phrase "subject to the jurisdiction thereof.

Appropriately, in 1884 the Supreme Court held that children born to Indian parents were not born "subject to" U.S. jurisdiction because, among other reasons, the person so born could not change his status by his "own will without the action or assent of the United States." And "no one can become a citizen of a nation without its consent." Graglia says this decision "seemed to establish" that U.S. citizenship is "a consensual relation, requiring the consent of the United States."

Graglia seems to establish that there is no constitutional impediment to Congress ending the granting of birthright citizenship to those whose presence here is "not only without the government's consent but in violation of its law."

George F. Will - An argument to be made about immigrant babies and citizenship - washingtonpost.com

 

[JakeStarkey]

Graglia's interpretation reflects poorly on current reality. If right, which Graglia is not, any such "correction" would have to grandfather those already birthright citizens. If the GOP introduced such legislation, the citizens would vote it into extinction.

 

[chanel]

I agree. Of course grandfathering would have to be established I'm sure that's what they did in Ireland.

Almost 80 percent approved the ban there. I bet the US would have similar support. Hell I bet people would be ok with amnesty if they knew the bleeding might stop.

 

[Intense]

Intense describes himself and his running podjos when he writes, "You project, you imply, you prejudge what is acceptable. You create labels and attempt to project them within your limited scope."

The great majority of the country simply do not care what you think.

Just keep selling your crap and disinformation without regard for the truth. That's what you are paid for Jake. That's what you sold out for. Image over substance.

 

[Intense]

Graglia's interpretation reflects poorly on current reality. If right, which Graglia is not, any such "correction" would have to grandfather those already birthright citizens. If the GOP introduced such legislation, the citizens would vote it into extinction.

Demonizing, demoralizing, and projection. You should start all your sentences with you can only hope.

 

[Angelhair]

Graglia's interpretation reflects poorly on current reality. If right, which Graglia is not, any such "correction" would have to grandfather those already birthright citizens. If the GOP introduced such legislation, the citizens would vote it into extinction.

In other words, amnesty via the back door....

 

[ConHog]

Graglia's interpretation reflects poorly on current reality. If right, which Graglia is not, any such "correction" would have to grandfather those already birthright citizens. If the GOP introduced such legislation, the citizens would vote it into extinction.

In other words, amnesty via the back door....

Amnesty is a misnomer as that would indicate NO penalty of any sort, no one I k now of is suggesting such, they should be required to pay a fine and do community service just as many people who commit crimes on the level of this are. Isn't that a better fairer, more profitable, more logical solution than rounding them all up and dumping them back in Mexico?

 

[JakeStarkey]

I agree. Of course grandfathering would have to be established I'm sure that's what they did in Ireland.

Almost 80 percent approved the ban there. I bet the US would have similar support. Hell I bet people would be ok with amnesty if they knew the bleeding might stop.

Hmmmm . . . that's feasible, isn't it? Amnesty, sealed borders, grandfathered birthright citizens, and pathway to citizenship.

You are right, Chanel: that would sell.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Intense, I do read and think about what you write. The fact is this: you are in an incredibly small group that have not and will not have any relevance in this debate nationally. Get over it: the illegals as a group are not going anywhere.

 

[Madeline]

If they don't go away, what then JakeStakey?

 

[JakeStarkey]

That is exactly where we are at, Madeline, because the support in their behavior outweighs the support for making them go. Chanel has offered a plan that I think is feasible.

 

[Madeline]

I know it sounds appealing, JakeStakey, but the US cannot absorb 10 to 20 Million new citizens. It'll break us. And why should a grant of Amnesty to those here now discourage anyone else from entering? I'd say it'll have the opposite effect; that Mexicans will believe Amnesty will be granted AGAIN once illegals reach another critical mass.

Deportation and all that it will mean to American lives is painful, but I don't see an alternative. And as I have said elsewhere, the US has to take an active role to helping Mexico rebuild its middle class. I think discussing Amnesty as if it were an option is a fairy tale we are telling ourselves so we can postpone yet AGAIN facing up to harsh realities.

 

[tsalkonocii]

Why would England, or example, consider a baby born in England to be an American??

In actuality most European nations do in fact give citizenship to so called anchor babies. Although admittedly no European nations have the problem we have. Kinda hard to swim the Channel to have a baby and all that.

Wrong. NO European nation grants birth right citizenship. Ireland was the only one and they just abolished it.

With tallying completed in all 34 counting centres, 79.17% of voters wanted to end the automatic citizenship right for all babies born in Ireland.

The government said change was needed because foreign women were travelling to Ireland to give birth in order to get an EU passport for their babies.

Ireland has been the only EU country to grant such a right.

BBC NEWS | Europe | Ireland votes to end birth right

What an incentive to break the law. Who can argue that wanting a better life for your children is a bad thing?

End that; and the illegals will leave and others won't come Pretty simple plan.

I am pro ending the loophole, it will require a CON amendment though.

No, it only requires enforcing the constitution

What 'Subject to the Jurisdiction Thereof' Really Means