Citizenship-By-Birth Faces Challenges

[Againsheila]

Interesting point. If the 14th amendment did not grant citizenship to all children born in the US and we use the birth certificate as proof of citizenship, then each parent would have to prove that they are a citizen before a birth certificate could be issued to the child. How would the parents prove their citizenship since they may have a birth certificate and might be the issue of illegal aliens?

Once again, Logic Boy, how do you think they prove it NOW? Birth certificates only serve as proof of citizenship if the people involved were actually all born here. What do you suppose a naturalized citizen does to prove his citizenship?

Birth Certificates are the ultimate proof of citizenship now. If the 14th amendment were interpreted so birth within the US did not automatically grant citizenship. Then your birth certificate and mine would be worthless as proof of citizenship. Furthermore alternate methods of proof of citizen revolve around proving that you were born here. So how would one prove they are a citizen?

Once again, the problem with Obama's birthcertificate, not enough info. Mine has my parents names and where they were born, and even though I was born on a military base in England, at 18 I had to become a naturalized citizen so I have my citizenship papers as well. Funny thing, somehow the interpretation of the law changed between 1975 and now. My sisters kids were born in Canada, not on an American base and her husband is Canadian and her children are considered American citizens born abroad. Now I know the law didn't change, only the interpretation of that law. That's why it's so important that this go to the supreme court.

 

[Againsheila]

Once again, Logic Boy, how do you think they prove it NOW? Birth certificates only serve as proof of citizenship if the people involved were actually all born here. What do you suppose a naturalized citizen does to prove his citizenship?

Show his naturalization papers? I have mine.....do you have yours? I also have my birthcertificate and my passport.

If the interpretation of the 14th amendment was that citizenship is not conferred based on birth in the US, your birth certificate would be worthless as proof of citizenship. To get a passport, you supply your birth certificate, or if a naturalized citizen then your naturalization papers. So unless you are naturalized how would you prove your citizenship? I suppose we, being 300 million plus, would need to get a new document in which we proved that both of our parents were born in the US or naturalized. Not sure how that could be done if the birth certificate is not valid proof.

I had to provide both my naturalization papers and my birth certificate. They were very confused. Couldn't figure out why I was a naturalized citizen when I was born to two American citizens on an American military base overseas. Like I said, Sometime after 1975, the INTERPRETATION of the law changed.

 

[Flopper]

Show his naturalization papers? I have mine.....do you have yours? I also have my birthcertificate and my passport.

If the interpretation of the 14th amendment was that citizenship is not conferred based on birth in the US, your birth certificate would be worthless as proof of citizenship. To get a passport, you supply your birth certificate, or if a naturalized citizen then your naturalization papers. So unless you are naturalized how would you prove your citizenship? I suppose we, being 300 million plus, would need to get a new document in which we proved that both of our parents were born in the US or naturalized. Not sure how that could be done if the birth certificate is not valid proof.

I had to provide both my naturalization papers and my birth certificate. They were very confused. Couldn't figure out why I was a naturalized citizen when I was born to two American citizens on an American military base overseas. Like I said, Sometime after 1975, the INTERPRETATION of the law changed.

Very few Americans have naturalization papers. For a vast number of Americans the birth certificate is their only proof of citizenship. To interpret the 14th amendment that birth in the US does not constitute citizenship would invalidate the birth certificate as proof of citizenship. Since passports are granted based on holding a birth certificate, passports would not be proof of citizenship.

This would be insane. There is no way the courts are going to do this.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Interesting point. If the 14th amendment did not grant citizenship to all children born in the US and we use the birth certificate as proof of citizenship, then each parent would have to prove that they are a citizen before a birth certificate could be issued to the child. How would the parents prove their citizenship since they may have a birth certificate and might be the issue of illegal aliens?

Once again, Logic Boy, how do you think they prove it NOW? Birth certificates only serve as proof of citizenship if the people involved were actually all born here. What do you suppose a naturalized citizen does to prove his citizenship?

Show his naturalization papers? I have mine.....do you have yours? I also have my birthcertificate and my passport.

Why would I have naturalization papers? I was never a non-citizen. Since the question was about people who didn't start out as citizens, nothing about me would be comparable or applicable to the situation. Duhhh.

 

[Againsheila]

Once again, Logic Boy, how do you think they prove it NOW? Birth certificates only serve as proof of citizenship if the people involved were actually all born here. What do you suppose a naturalized citizen does to prove his citizenship?

Show his naturalization papers? I have mine.....do you have yours? I also have my birthcertificate and my passport.

Why would I have naturalization papers? I was never a non-citizen. Since the question was about people who didn't start out as citizens, nothing about me would be comparable or applicable to the situation. Duhhh.

According to today's interpretation, I was a citizen at birth. Yet, according to the interpretation of the law at the time I wasn't. Following that logic neither I, nor McCain could run for president. BTW, I was born on American soil, in ENGLAND. The military base is considered American soil and was even at that time considered American soil. And yet, I still had to get naturalized.

I disagree with you. Since my birthcertificate lists my parents names and their place of birth, all birth certificates have to do is that. You must be thinking of the sham birth certificate that Obama provides. If one or both of your parents are born in the USA, you are an American citizen when you are born here, but if neither of them were born here or were here legally at the time of your birth, you are not an American citizen, simple as that.

 

[Cecilie1200]

We aren't going to convince them of anything. We should make coming here LESS attractive. ZERO help of any kind. No medical. No education. No jobs. No anchor babies.

As to crime these so called law abiding illegals commit who said anything about prison or trial? Just prove you are a citizen and your on your way. Otherwise your on the next flight out.

Denying jobs is the key. Subsidized healthcare is available in Mexico so I don’t see that as a big attraction. As far as welfare is concerned:
"MYTH #3: The nation spends billions of dollars on welfare for undocumented immigrants.
FACTS: To the contrary, undocumented immigrants are not eligible to receive any "welfare" benefits and even legal immigrants are severely restricted in the benefits they can receive.
As the Congressional Research Service points out in a 2007 report, undocumented immigrants, who comprise nearly one-third of all immigrants in the country, are not eligible to receive public "welfare" benefits -- ever."
Illegal immigrants on welfare: fact or fiction? | Immigration Chronicles | Chron.com - Houston Chronicle

If state agencies dole out welfare funds to illegal immigrants, then that’s the states problem.

Healthcare is a BIG attraction. Do you really think healthcare in Mexico for anyone who isn't filthy rich is even remotely comparable to American healthcare?

As for "not eligible to receive welfare benefits", there's always the "benefit" of wandering into an ER, getting care, and then disappearing into the sunset, never to be heard from or billed again.

Furthermore, the Center for Immigration Studies has found that illegals cost us $2.5 billion in Medicaid, $2.2 billion for treatment for the uninsured, and $1.9 billion for food stamps, WIC, and free school lunches. How do you suppose they're managing to do that?

To begin with. Mexico does have a fully subsidize healthcare for the poor. Considering what Medicaid pays, I doubt very few Mexicans will cross the boarder just to get medical care. The primary reason Mexicans cross the boarder is to get work. In Mexico there are jobs available but those jobs are usually part time jobs with very low pay. Often someone can earn in a day what they might earn in Mexico in a week. That's the attraction. That's the problem we need to solve.

All the programs that you mentioned are administered by your state government. If they grant services to illegal aliens then that's on them. The feds dependent on the states to screen applicants and administer the funds. The problem the states have is that these people are undocumented. There is not national id, so how do you determine if they are legal? Social Security, Driver's Licenses are not require in most states. Even when state law requires proper id, agencies are reluctant to turn people away.[/QUOTE]

Amazingly enough, fully-subsidized shit is still shit. So it really makes no frigging difference if the crap medical care the poor get in Mexico is completely paid-for or not. Call me the next time you run off to Mexico to sample the medical care their poor get.

Mexico's Health-Care System :: MedToGo International

Mexico fosters three unequal, yet parallel systems of health care. There are six government-run social security institutions that provide care for approximately 50 million of Mexico’s gainfully employed. The uninsured poor, comprised of about 40 million Mexicans, receive limited health-care benefits administered by the Ministry of Health of Mexico. The private sector, which represents about 3 million Mexicans, is comprised of individuals whose health-care funding is met through private insurance carriers. We will limit our discussion to the two health organizations that are accessible to travelers and expatriates living in Mexico.

Nearly half of Mexico’s 100 million inhabitants have no health insurance benefits at all. Their preventive care is limited to vaccinations and oral rehydration programs for children. Care in this sector is extremely limited. For example, infant mortality is ten times higher here than in the parallel private sector. Red Cross or Cruz Roja hospitals service the poor and are accessible to anyone in Mexico regardless of their ability to pay. We cannot recommend that travelers seek care in this sector unless there are no other options.

HEALTH CARE

Mexico is a health care dichotomy. Its medical infrastructure is quite good for the most part and can be excellent in major cities, but rural areas and indigenous communities still have poor medical coverage, and people are often forced to travel to urban areas to obtain even basic medical care.

Now, tell me again how you "doubt" that poor people from Mexico would have ANY desire to come to America for healthcare.

Oh, and "well, that's on the states". Nice backpedal. "Illegals don't get any benefits; oh, wait, I guess they do, but that's someone else's fault." Yeah, that's helpful.

In the future, shut the hell up until you have something REAL to say.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Interesting point. If the 14th amendment did not grant citizenship to all children born in the US and we use the birth certificate as proof of citizenship, then each parent would have to prove that they are a citizen before a birth certificate could be issued to the child. How would the parents prove their citizenship since they may have a birth certificate and might be the issue of illegal aliens?

Once again, Logic Boy, how do you think they prove it NOW? Birth certificates only serve as proof of citizenship if the people involved were actually all born here. What do you suppose a naturalized citizen does to prove his citizenship?

Birth Certificates are the ultimate proof of citizenship now. If the 14th amendment were interpreted so birth within the US did not automatically grant citizenship. Then your birth certificate and mine would be worthless as proof of citizenship. Furthermore alternate methods of proof of citizen revolve around proving that you were born here. So how would one prove they are a citizen?

Dear, my birth certificate ALONE isn't proof of citizenship anyway. Haven't you ever filled out an I-9 form for employment? Do they accept your birth certificate all by itself? Duhh. You act like you just woke up in a new world where people have to prove citizenship or something.

 

[Cecilie1200]

If the interpretation of the 14th amendment was that citizenship is not conferred based on birth in the US, your birth certificate would be worthless as proof of citizenship. To get a passport, you supply your birth certificate, or if a naturalized citizen then your naturalization papers. So unless you are naturalized how would you prove your citizenship? I suppose we, being 300 million plus, would need to get a new document in which we proved that both of our parents were born in the US or naturalized. Not sure how that could be done if the birth certificate is not valid proof.

I had to provide both my naturalization papers and my birth certificate. They were very confused. Couldn't figure out why I was a naturalized citizen when I was born to two American citizens on an American military base overseas. Like I said, Sometime after 1975, the INTERPRETATION of the law changed.

Very few Americans have naturalization papers. For a vast number of Americans the birth certificate is their only proof of citizenship. To interpret the 14th amendment that birth in the US does not constitute citizenship would invalidate the birth certificate as proof of citizenship. Since passports are granted based on holding a birth certificate, passports would not be proof of citizenship.

This would be insane. There is no way the courts are going to do this.

You don't have a job, do you? That's got to be the only explanation for this utterly gormless belief of yours that the vast majority of Americans are wandering around, waving birth certificates to prove their citizenship. I have never in my life been able to submit JUST my birth certificate alone for ANYTHING, and I'm flummoxed at how you've been getting through life without ever having to produce a paper trail for yourself.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Show his naturalization papers? I have mine.....do you have yours? I also have my birthcertificate and my passport.

Why would I have naturalization papers? I was never a non-citizen. Since the question was about people who didn't start out as citizens, nothing about me would be comparable or applicable to the situation. Duhhh.

According to today's interpretation, I was a citizen at birth. Yet, according to the interpretation of the law at the time I wasn't. Following that logic neither I, nor McCain could run for president. BTW, I was born on American soil, in ENGLAND. The military base is considered American soil and was even at that time considered American soil. And yet, I still had to get naturalized.

I disagree with you. Since my birthcertificate lists my parents names and their place of birth, all birth certificates have to do is that. You must be thinking of the sham birth certificate that Obama provides. If one or both of your parents are born in the USA, you are an American citizen when you are born here, but if neither of them were born here or were here legally at the time of your birth, you are not an American citizen, simple as that.

I'm not thinking about Obama at all. My birth certificate has NEVER been considered sufficient proof all by itself for ANYTHING I do. And I don't happen to have any naturalization papers, because I've never been naturalized. Both sides of my family have been here since before the War of Northern Aggression.

 

[Againsheila]

Why would I have naturalization papers? I was never a non-citizen. Since the question was about people who didn't start out as citizens, nothing about me would be comparable or applicable to the situation. Duhhh.

According to today's interpretation, I was a citizen at birth. Yet, according to the interpretation of the law at the time I wasn't. Following that logic neither I, nor McCain could run for president. BTW, I was born on American soil, in ENGLAND. The military base is considered American soil and was even at that time considered American soil. And yet, I still had to get naturalized.

I disagree with you. Since my birthcertificate lists my parents names and their place of birth, all birth certificates have to do is that. You must be thinking of the sham birth certificate that Obama provides. If one or both of your parents are born in the USA, you are an American citizen when you are born here, but if neither of them were born here or were here legally at the time of your birth, you are not an American citizen, simple as that.

I'm not thinking about Obama at all. My birth certificate has NEVER been considered sufficient proof all by itself for ANYTHING I do. And I don't happen to have any naturalization papers, because I've never been naturalized. Both sides of my family have been here since before the War of Northern Aggression.

LOL, so has mine. I was born on American soil in England to two American citizens...my father was career Air Force. Oh, and btw, my moms family fought on both sides of the REVOLUTIONARY war.

 

[Flopper]

Show his naturalization papers? I have mine.....do you have yours? I also have my birthcertificate and my passport.

Why would I have naturalization papers? I was never a non-citizen. Since the question was about people who didn't start out as citizens, nothing about me would be comparable or applicable to the situation. Duhhh.

According to today's interpretation, I was a citizen at birth. Yet, according to the interpretation of the law at the time I wasn't. Following that logic neither I, nor McCain could run for president. BTW, I was born on American soil, in ENGLAND. The military base is considered American soil and was even at that time considered American soil. And yet, I still had to get naturalized.

I disagree with you. Since my birthcertificate lists my parents names and their place of birth, all birth certificates have to do is that. You must be thinking of the sham birth certificate that Obama provides. If one or both of your parents are born in the USA, you are an American citizen when you are born here, but if neither of them were born here or were here legally at the time of your birth, you are not an American citizen, simple as that.

Birth certificates vary from state to state. When you fill out the form for a child's birth certificate, the parents do not have to provide any proof of citizenship. In fact you can write unknown for the father. It's all accepted at face value. So how could a birth certificate be accepted as proof of citizenship.

If a child of two illegal immigrants is born in this country, do you really expect the parents to give Mexico as their place of birth if it means their child might not be a citizen.

 

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,


1. In my professonal opinon, *illegal immigration* is and has been the most detrimental thing to the American way of life in the last fifty plus years.
2. The problems we have seen with the American politicians, are,
(a) They don't give a **** about the American way of life.
(b) And they are way too stupid to be in a place of power.
3. The actual smart people don't go into politics, they go into the private sector.
4. If we were really serious about stopping *illegal immigration* we would find and deport every illegal alein who has crossed into this Country in the last 60 years, and their offspring, even generational.
5. And at the same time we would build a double 30 foot wall, with some deadly chemical in between, if you go there, you shall die instantly, and be left for dead.
6. Also we should use electrical shock at the first wall, that will send them to the ground, if they get past that, its death.
7. Its the only way to show we are serious about tresspassing in to this Country, come in legally, or get your ass thrown out!



Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

 

[Cecilie1200]

According to today's interpretation, I was a citizen at birth. Yet, according to the interpretation of the law at the time I wasn't. Following that logic neither I, nor McCain could run for president. BTW, I was born on American soil, in ENGLAND. The military base is considered American soil and was even at that time considered American soil. And yet, I still had to get naturalized.

I disagree with you. Since my birthcertificate lists my parents names and their place of birth, all birth certificates have to do is that. You must be thinking of the sham birth certificate that Obama provides. If one or both of your parents are born in the USA, you are an American citizen when you are born here, but if neither of them were born here or were here legally at the time of your birth, you are not an American citizen, simple as that.

I'm not thinking about Obama at all. My birth certificate has NEVER been considered sufficient proof all by itself for ANYTHING I do. And I don't happen to have any naturalization papers, because I've never been naturalized. Both sides of my family have been here since before the War of Northern Aggression.

LOL, so has mine. I was born on American soil in England to two American citizens...my father was career Air Force. Oh, and btw, my moms family fought on both sides of the REVOLUTIONARY war.

And I care because . . . ? You seem to be mistakenly thinking this is some sort of one-upsmanship thing here, where I'm dying to hear your personal details. I'm really, REALLY not. You asked about my naturalization papers. I said I don't have any. You wandered off onto smucking Obama, as though I give a shit. I brought it back to you asking about papers I have no reason to have. Now you're telling me about your frigging family history, as though I give a shit. Try to stay on-topic.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Why would I have naturalization papers? I was never a non-citizen. Since the question was about people who didn't start out as citizens, nothing about me would be comparable or applicable to the situation. Duhhh.

According to today's interpretation, I was a citizen at birth. Yet, according to the interpretation of the law at the time I wasn't. Following that logic neither I, nor McCain could run for president. BTW, I was born on American soil, in ENGLAND. The military base is considered American soil and was even at that time considered American soil. And yet, I still had to get naturalized.

I disagree with you. Since my birthcertificate lists my parents names and their place of birth, all birth certificates have to do is that. You must be thinking of the sham birth certificate that Obama provides. If one or both of your parents are born in the USA, you are an American citizen when you are born here, but if neither of them were born here or were here legally at the time of your birth, you are not an American citizen, simple as that.

Birth certificates vary from state to state. When you fill out the form for a child's birth certificate, the parents do not have to provide any proof of citizenship. In fact you can write unknown for the father. It's all accepted at face value. So how could a birth certificate be accepted as proof of citizenship.

If a child of two illegal immigrants is born in this country, do you really expect the parents to give Mexico as their place of birth if it means their child might not be a citizen.

When did I ever suggest that it WAS accepted as proof of citizenship? That's YOUR line, dimwit, not mine. I keep telling you that citizens have paper trails, and YOU keep babbling on and on about smucking birth certificates as though they're the be-all and end-all of proof.

At least try to keep straight who's making which argument.

 

[JakeStarkey]

To try to do it some people's way would create a vast state and federal bureaucracy. The "paper" trail is simply not sufficient. Some peron here is at heart a secret statist just like The Rabbi.

 

[gautama]

Children of illegals in my opinion are illegal. A live birth document should be given stating the the child was born to a mother of X country. After the mother has taken advantage of our medical facilities for delivering her illegal, both illegal mother and child should be deported. Instantly.

Your opinion doesn't override the Constitution.

AGAIN, POLK:

BULLSHIT, Polk......as usual you are spewing out Liberrhoidal BULLSHIT .

The Fed Law HAS to be a law governed by the Constitution. Re the Constitutional excerpt: The implication underlying all laws is that the actions have to have the premise of being applied to LEGAL entities that qualify for the action involved.

It is an established FACT in law that one NEVER gets rewarded for committing an illegal act. Or, phrased differently, "one is denied the fruits of a poisoned tree".

Thus, in the excerpt: if you are ILLEGALLY naturalized, you're naturalization is NULL & VOID. If you are born in America ILLEGALLY your citizenship is NULL & VOID.

Obviously. this has been interpreted ERRONEOUSLY by the majority of the states granting citizenship to the ILLEGAL immigrants' babies.

Clarification of this issue is extremely important due to the current exacerbation of the palpably unrestricted invasion of primarily Mexican ILLEGAL immigrants.

 

[Againsheila]

I'm not thinking about Obama at all. My birth certificate has NEVER been considered sufficient proof all by itself for ANYTHING I do. And I don't happen to have any naturalization papers, because I've never been naturalized. Both sides of my family have been here since before the War of Northern Aggression.

LOL, so has mine. I was born on American soil in England to two American citizens...my father was career Air Force. Oh, and btw, my moms family fought on both sides of the REVOLUTIONARY war.

And I care because . . . ? You seem to be mistakenly thinking this is some sort of one-upsmanship thing here, where I'm dying to hear your personal details. I'm really, REALLY not. You asked about my naturalization papers. I said I don't have any. You wandered off onto smucking Obama, as though I give a shit. I brought it back to you asking about papers I have no reason to have. Now you're telling me about your frigging family history, as though I give a shit. Try to stay on-topic.

Ah yes, you can mention the civil war, but I can't mention the revolutionary war....can you say "hypocrite"?

You made it sound as if you have a right to citizenship because your family has been here since the civil war. Well, my family has been here since the revolutionary war and I still had to be naturalized.

 

[Cecilie1200]

LOL, so has mine. I was born on American soil in England to two American citizens...my father was career Air Force. Oh, and btw, my moms family fought on both sides of the REVOLUTIONARY war.

And I care because . . . ? You seem to be mistakenly thinking this is some sort of one-upsmanship thing here, where I'm dying to hear your personal details. I'm really, REALLY not. You asked about my naturalization papers. I said I don't have any. You wandered off onto smucking Obama, as though I give a shit. I brought it back to you asking about papers I have no reason to have. Now you're telling me about your frigging family history, as though I give a shit. Try to stay on-topic.

Ah yes, you can mention the civil war, but I can't mention the revolutionary war....can you say "hypocrite"?

You made it sound as if you have a right to citizenship because your family has been here since the civil war. Well, my family has been here since the revolutionary war and I still had to be naturalized.

If you're QUITE finished hunting for things to be butt-chapped about . . .

I never said, or even implied, that I have a "right to citizenship" based on longevity. I was pretty clear - except in the case of someone who's looking for a reason to be offended and insulted - that my citizenship derives not just from having been born in this country (which I was), but ALSO from the fact that I descended from people who became citizens through legal channels. They merely happened to have done so somewhere between the Revolution and the War of Northern Aggression.

That "also" is what's important here, not an entirely unsolicited rant on how YOUR family has been here XYZ, like I give a damn. You weren't born in the US, and had the bad luck to be born at a time when the interpretation of the laws in that regard were ambiguous, and so your citizenship status required further clarification. Life sucks, but you might want to get over being so hyper-defensive about it.

And now we're done here, because I've already wasted a lot more time on this than it was worth.

 

[Sky Dancer]

My family has been here since the 1890's. So what?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Cecilie as usual misses common points.

1) The civil war is properly known as the War of Southern Aggression.

2) The SCOTUS
a. is not going to overturn the 14th, and it will not allow Congress to do it.
b. if it did overturn the 14th will still grandather every child born in the states before the date of the rulling.

I am tired of folks who are talking about matters about which they know nothing.