Are Children of Illegal Immigrants Citizens of the U.S.?

[Alexander the Arrogant]

I have my own views but I want to hear what you guys think first.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Yes

 

[MisterBeale]

According to law, currently, of course.

 

[MisterBeale]

Should the be? Don't be silly.

 

[MisterBeale]

That's like saying thieves should be able to bequeath their ill gotten gains to their descendants if they had never been caught.

Seriously? Of course not. Just because you steal a priceless painting from someone's home, does not mean you can leave it to your children and expect them to have legal ownership over it. That would never fly in the art world.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

I have my own views but I want to hear what you guys think first.

Yep.

 

[Dot Com]

as it stands now? Yes but I would amend the 14th Amendment to prohibit "anchor babying". It wasn't meant to favor people in the country illegally now was it/

 

[Alexander the Arrogant]

That's like saying thieves should be able to bequeath their ill gotten gains to their descendants if they had never been caught.

Seriously? Of course not. Just because you steal a priceless painting from someone's home, does not mean you can leave it to your children and expect them to have legal ownership over it. That would never fly in the art world.

What would you recommend doing with the children of illegal immigrants then? Have them deported?

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

That's like saying thieves should be able to bequeath their ill gotten gains to their descendants if they had never been caught.

Seriously? Of course not. Just because you steal a priceless painting from someone's home, does not mean you can leave it to your children and expect them to have legal ownership over it. That would never fly in the art world.

What would you recommend doing with the children of illegal immigrants then? Have them deported?

The children of illegal immigrants are American citizens and have every right to be here.

 

[Dekster]

If they are born in the US, they are US citizens PERIOD. Their citizenship is exactly the same as mine and everybody else born in the USA.

 

[Kat]

They are, but I don't necessarily think they should be. After all they were born here illegally. Illegals are coming in droves to have children here. Why is that? To suck off the tit of the government?

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

I'd have to go through those laws that have been established and its original intent during the period the Constitution was implemented, and look at those defining characteristics of what constitutes a citizen of the United States.


United States Congress, “An act to establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization” (March 26, 1790).


Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, That any Alien being a free white person, who shall have resided within the limits and under the jurisdiction of the United States for the term of two years, may be admitted to become a citizen thereof on application to any common law Court of record in any one of the States wherein he shall have resided for the term of one year at least, and making proof to the satisfaction of such Court that he is a person of good character, and taking the oath or affirmation prescribed by law to support the Constitution of the United States, which Oath or Affirmation such Court shall administer, and the Clerk of such Court shall record such Application, and the proceedings thereon; and thereupon such person shall be considered as a Citizen of the United States. And the children of such person so naturalized, dwelling within the United States, being under the age of twenty one years at the time of such naturalization, shall also be considered as citizens of the United States. And the children of citizens of the United States that may be born beyond Sea, or out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born Citizens: Provided, that the right of citizenship shall not descend to persons whose fathers have never been resident in the United States: Provided also, that no person heretofore proscribed by any States, shall be admitted a citizen as aforesaid, except by an Act of the Legislature of the State in which such person was proscribed.


The Fourteenth Amendment was enacted to deal with citizenship of former slaves.

 

[Syriusly]

I'd have to go through those laws that have been established and its original intent during the period the Constitution was implemented, and look at those defining characteristics of what constitutes a citizen of the United States.


United States Congress, “An act to establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization” (March 26, 1790).


Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, That any Alien being a free white person, who shall have resided within the limits and under the jurisdiction of the United States for the term of two years, may be admitted to become a citizen thereof on application to any common law Court of record in any one of the States wherein he shall have resided for the term of one year at least, and making proof to the satisfaction of such Court that he is a person of good character, and taking the oath or affirmation prescribed by law to support the Constitution of the United States, which Oath or Affirmation such Court shall administer, and the Clerk of such Court shall record such Application, and the proceedings thereon; and thereupon such person shall be considered as a Citizen of the United States. And the children of such person so naturalized, dwelling within the United States, being under the age of twenty one years at the time of such naturalization, shall also be considered as citizens of the United States. And the children of citizens of the United States that may be born beyond Sea, or out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born Citizens: Provided, that the right of citizenship shall not descend to persons whose fathers have never been resident in the United States: Provided also, that no person heretofore proscribed by any States, shall be admitted a citizen as aforesaid, except by an Act of the Legislature of the State in which such person was proscribed.


The Fourteenth Amendment was enacted to deal with citizenship of former slaves.

How hilarious- you quote the Naturalization Act of 1790- which was repealed- and ignore the language of the 14th Amendment- apparently believing it only applies to former slaves.

This is part of the United States Constitution- unlike your void Act of 1790-

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.

Very simple- there are two conditions:

1. Born in the United States and
2. Born subject to the jurisdiction of the United States.

Is a child in the United States subject to the jurisdiction of the laws of the United States? Yes.

What child would not be? The child of a foreign diplomat(or an invading army).

The Constitution is quite clear on the issue.

Any child born in the United States- other than children of diplomats- is born a U.S. citizen.

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

I'd have to go through those laws that have been established and its original intent during the period the Constitution was implemented, and look at those defining characteristics of what constitutes a citizen of the United States.


United States Congress, “An act to establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization” (March 26, 1790).


Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, That any Alien being a free white person, who shall have resided within the limits and under the jurisdiction of the United States for the term of two years, may be admitted to become a citizen thereof on application to any common law Court of record in any one of the States wherein he shall have resided for the term of one year at least, and making proof to the satisfaction of such Court that he is a person of good character, and taking the oath or affirmation prescribed by law to support the Constitution of the United States, which Oath or Affirmation such Court shall administer, and the Clerk of such Court shall record such Application, and the proceedings thereon; and thereupon such person shall be considered as a Citizen of the United States. And the children of such person so naturalized, dwelling within the United States, being under the age of twenty one years at the time of such naturalization, shall also be considered as citizens of the United States. And the children of citizens of the United States that may be born beyond Sea, or out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born Citizens: Provided, that the right of citizenship shall not descend to persons whose fathers have never been resident in the United States: Provided also, that no person heretofore proscribed by any States, shall be admitted a citizen as aforesaid, except by an Act of the Legislature of the State in which such person was proscribed.


The Fourteenth Amendment was enacted to deal with citizenship of former slaves.

How hilarious- you quote the Naturalization Act of 1790- which was repealed- and ignore the language of the 14th Amendment- apparently believing it only applies to former slaves.

This is part of the United States Constitution- unlike your void Act of 1790-

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.

Very simple- there are two conditions:

1. Born in the United States and
2. Born subject to the jurisdiction of the United States.

Is a child in the United States subject to the jurisdiction of the laws of the United States? Yes.

What child would not be? The child of a foreign diplomat(or an invading army).

The Constitution is quite clear on the issue.

Any child born in the United States- other than children of diplomats- is born a U.S. citizen.

"who shall have resided within the limits and under the jurisdiction of the United States for the term of two years, may be admitted to become a citizen thereof on application to any common law Court of record in any one of the States"

And the children of such person so naturalized, dwelling within the United States, being under the age of twenty one years at the time of such naturalization
- “An act to establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization” (March 26, 1790)


That's what happens when people don't read before they post. Care to give it another go genius?

 

[MisterBeale]

That's like saying thieves should be able to bequeath their ill gotten gains to their descendants if they had never been caught.

Seriously? Of course not. Just because you steal a priceless painting from someone's home, does not mean you can leave it to your children and expect them to have legal ownership over it. That would never fly in the art world.

What would you recommend doing with the children of illegal immigrants then? Have them deported?

Have them go home with their parents naturally.

Derp.

If they aren't minors any longer, I would assume they are citizens of their parents nation. If not, well, naturally, currently they are citizens as it stands, you can't make retroactive laws. So I guess they have to stay.

People's actions are predicated on how law is written at the time of their behavior. It's obviously no fault of the kids that are here. But the parents need to go. It will be nice for the State getting to suck the children dry of their financial resources trying to get the parents back into the country though, won't it?

But obviously it is a bad law that is causing unintended and ill advised affects. D.C. should deal with it.

 

[Syriusly]

I'd have to go through those laws that have been established and its original intent during the period the Constitution was implemented, and look at those defining characteristics of what constitutes a citizen of the United States.


United States Congress, “An act to establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization” (March 26, 1790).


Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, That any Alien being a free white person, who shall have resided within the limits and under the jurisdiction of the United States for the term of two years, may be admitted to become a citizen thereof on application to any common law Court of record in any one of the States wherein he shall have resided for the term of one year at least, and making proof to the satisfaction of such Court that he is a person of good character, and taking the oath or affirmation prescribed by law to support the Constitution of the United States, which Oath or Affirmation such Court shall administer, and the Clerk of such Court shall record such Application, and the proceedings thereon; and thereupon such person shall be considered as a Citizen of the United States. And the children of such person so naturalized, dwelling within the United States, being under the age of twenty one years at the time of such naturalization, shall also be considered as citizens of the United States. And the children of citizens of the United States that may be born beyond Sea, or out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born Citizens: Provided, that the right of citizenship shall not descend to persons whose fathers have never been resident in the United States: Provided also, that no person heretofore proscribed by any States, shall be admitted a citizen as aforesaid, except by an Act of the Legislature of the State in which such person was proscribed.


The Fourteenth Amendment was enacted to deal with citizenship of former slaves.

How hilarious- you quote the Naturalization Act of 1790- which was repealed- and ignore the language of the 14th Amendment- apparently believing it only applies to former slaves.

This is part of the United States Constitution- unlike your void Act of 1790-

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.

Very simple- there are two conditions:

1. Born in the United States and
2. Born subject to the jurisdiction of the United States.

Is a child in the United States subject to the jurisdiction of the laws of the United States? Yes.

What child would not be? The child of a foreign diplomat(or an invading army).

The Constitution is quite clear on the issue.

Any child born in the United States- other than children of diplomats- is born a U.S. citizen.

"who shall have resided within the limits and under the jurisdiction of the United States for the term of two years, may be admitted to become a citizen thereof on application to any common law Court of record in any one of the States"

And the children of such person so naturalized, dwelling within the United States, being under the age of twenty one years at the time of such naturalization
- “An act to establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization” (March 26, 1790)


That's what happens when people don't read before they post. Care to give it another go genius?

Sigh.

"An Act to establish an Uniform Rule of Naturalization (March 26, 1790)

• Applied only to naturalization- not natural born citizens
• Was voided by the passage 5 years later of the Naturalization Act of 1790
• Also said that this applied only to free white persons

Both the 1790 and 1795 Naturalization Acts are laws- superceded by the United States Constitution which says:

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.

Very simple- there are two conditions:

1. Born in the United States and
2. Born subject to the jurisdiction of the United States.

Is a child in the United States subject to the jurisdiction of the laws of the United States? Yes.

What child would not be? The child of a foreign diplomat(or an invading army).

The Constitution is quite clear on the issue.

Any child born in the United States- other than children of diplomats- is born a U.S. citizen.

You don't get to ignore the United States Constitution.

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

I'd have to go through those laws that have been established and its original intent during the period the Constitution was implemented, and look at those defining characteristics of what constitutes a citizen of the United States.


United States Congress, “An act to establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization” (March 26, 1790).


Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, That any Alien being a free white person, who shall have resided within the limits and under the jurisdiction of the United States for the term of two years, may be admitted to become a citizen thereof on application to any common law Court of record in any one of the States wherein he shall have resided for the term of one year at least, and making proof to the satisfaction of such Court that he is a person of good character, and taking the oath or affirmation prescribed by law to support the Constitution of the United States, which Oath or Affirmation such Court shall administer, and the Clerk of such Court shall record such Application, and the proceedings thereon; and thereupon such person shall be considered as a Citizen of the United States. And the children of such person so naturalized, dwelling within the United States, being under the age of twenty one years at the time of such naturalization, shall also be considered as citizens of the United States. And the children of citizens of the United States that may be born beyond Sea, or out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born Citizens: Provided, that the right of citizenship shall not descend to persons whose fathers have never been resident in the United States: Provided also, that no person heretofore proscribed by any States, shall be admitted a citizen as aforesaid, except by an Act of the Legislature of the State in which such person was proscribed.


The Fourteenth Amendment was enacted to deal with citizenship of former slaves.

How hilarious- you quote the Naturalization Act of 1790- which was repealed- and ignore the language of the 14th Amendment- apparently believing it only applies to former slaves.

This is part of the United States Constitution- unlike your void Act of 1790-

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.

Very simple- there are two conditions:

1. Born in the United States and
2. Born subject to the jurisdiction of the United States.

Is a child in the United States subject to the jurisdiction of the laws of the United States? Yes.

What child would not be? The child of a foreign diplomat(or an invading army).

The Constitution is quite clear on the issue.

Any child born in the United States- other than children of diplomats- is born a U.S. citizen.

"who shall have resided within the limits and under the jurisdiction of the United States for the term of two years, may be admitted to become a citizen thereof on application to any common law Court of record in any one of the States"

And the children of such person so naturalized, dwelling within the United States, being under the age of twenty one years at the time of such naturalization
- “An act to establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization” (March 26, 1790)


That's what happens when people don't read before they post. Care to give it another go genius?

Sigh.

"An Act to establish an Uniform Rule of Naturalization (March 26, 1790)

• Applied only to naturalization- not natural born citizens
• Was voided by the passage 5 years later of the Naturalization Act of 1790
• Also said that this applied only to free white persons

Both the 1790 and 1795 Naturalization Acts are laws- superceded by the United States Constitution which says:

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.

Very simple- there are two conditions:

1. Born in the United States and
2. Born subject to the jurisdiction of the United States.

Is a child in the United States subject to the jurisdiction of the laws of the United States? Yes.

What child would not be? The child of a foreign diplomat(or an invading army).

The Constitution is quite clear on the issue.

Any child born in the United States- other than children of diplomats- is born a U.S. citizen.

You don't get to ignore the United States Constitution.

Do try to follow along.

The naturalization act of 1790 specified conditions where an immigrant would be considered a naturalized citizen in the United States.

The fourteen amendment was created solely as a result of the civil war and slavery that was abolished later through the thirteenth amendment. The fourteen ammedment was established to give blacks equal rights to be called naturalized citizens as whites were given previously in the act of 1790.

Unless you can provide quotes and documentation showing the legislatures' intent of the time the amendment was established, slavery was the only issue the fourteenth amendment was created to resolve.

Those two conditions you posted were already presented under the act to establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization of 1790. Read it again.

 

[Unkotare]

I have my own views but I want to hear what you guys think first.

It's not a matter of opinion. Anyone born in the US is a US citizen.

 

[Alexander the Arrogant]

I have my own views but I want to hear what you guys think first.

What I meant to say was "Do you think Children of Illegal Immigrants should be citizens of the U.S."

 

[bodecea]

They are, but I don't necessarily think they should be. After all they were born here illegally. Illegals are coming in droves to have children here. Why is that? To suck off the tit of the government?

How can someone be born illegally? Answer that one.