Trump Challenges Equal Endowment Of Birthright Citizenship For Children Of Illegal Migrants

Unkotare

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2011
Messages
96,174
Reaction score
10,749
Points
2,030
" Trump Challenges Equal Endowment Of Birthright Citizenship For Children Of Illegal Migrants "

Under current law, all babies born in United States are automatically granted citizenship, regardless of whether or not their parents are American. An executive order signed by President Trump would likely put an end to such legal protections.
...
However, the courts have not definitively ruled on the issue.
...

Critics of birthright citizenship oppose the fact that illegal immigrants and visitors to the United States can give birth to children who automatically have American citizenship rights.
When you have all these pregnant women about to give birth show up at US border trying to enter the USA so their babies can become US citizens, yes agree in these cases they should be denied US citizenship.
You can't apply the Constitution on a case-by-case basis.
 

9thIDdoc

Gold Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2011
Messages
6,540
Reaction score
1,866
Points
255
That was an idiotic law to begin with as applied to illegal aliens. Only a hugh incentive to break reasonable immigration laws. President Trump should do this'
 
OP
Monk-Eye

Monk-Eye

Gold Member
Joined
Feb 3, 2018
Messages
1,783
Reaction score
327
Points
140
" Protections Versus Endowment The Two Are Not The Same "

* Fugitives At Large *

by denying due process of law? only the right wing believes in sacrificing the end to the means.
Due process would determined that the parents are SUBJECTS of their country of origin and NOT SUBJECTS of us as such requires a formal agreement that occurs by means of us legal immigration system and therefore the children of illegal migrants are to be given jus sanguinin - citizenship of their parents .
 

danielpalos

Diamond Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2015
Messages
62,843
Reaction score
2,833
Points
1,855
Location
Alta California, federalist.
" Protections Versus Endowment The Two Are Not The Same "

* Fugitives At Large *

by denying due process of law? only the right wing believes in sacrificing the end to the means.
Due process would determined that the parents are SUBJECTS of their country of origin and NOT SUBJECTS of us as such requires a formal agreement that occurs by means of us legal immigration system and therefore the children of illegal migrants are to be given jus sanguinin - citizenship of their parents .
They are claiming to be refugees seeking refuge.
 
OP
Monk-Eye

Monk-Eye

Gold Member
Joined
Feb 3, 2018
Messages
1,783
Reaction score
327
Points
140
" Disregards That 11 Million Subjects Of Foreign Government Are Not Refugees "

* Go Get Lost Somewhere Else *

They are claiming to be refugees seeking refuge.
What is you estimate for the number of illegal migrants that do not file a request peition for status of refugee a consulate being that they are likely to be deported ?

What is your estimate for the number of illegal migrants which return to their home of origin or otherwise leave the united states upon being found ineligible for asylum ?

What is your estimate for the number of illegal migrants which have children in the us and were not ever eligible for a status as refugees ?


The number of immigrants who have been granted asylum more than doubled from 9,684 in FY 2014 to 19,831 in FY 2019. However, the number of immigrants who have been denied asylum or other relief grew even faster from 9,716 immigrants to 46,735 over the same time period. Six-nine percent (69%) of asylum seekers were denied asylum or other relief in 2019. See Figure 1

* Item Start Of Many Beneficial To Americans By Trump *

After many false starts — including the zero-tolerance policy that drove family separations — the Trump administration got a handle on the border thanks to its “remain in Mexico” policy and “safe third country” agreements with Guatemala, El Salvador, and Honduras.

These initiatives closed an enormous loophole in the U.S. asylum system — undeserving asylum-seekers were able to gain access to our country, stay here for years while their claims worked their way through overwhelmed immigration courts, and remain even after their claims were denied because we lack the capacity (or will) to track and deport them. This running, de facto amnesty served as a powerful magnet for migrants from Central America.

But the Trump administration managed to get Mexico to agree to the so-called Migration Protection Protocols. This meant that asylum-seekers from countries other than Mexico could be made to remain in Mexico while their claims were adjudicated in the U.S. Also, under the safe-third-country agreements, asylum-seekers could be sent to Guatemala, El Salvador, or Honduras (whichever wasn’t their home country) to apply for asylum there. The theory was that if they were genuinely persecuted in their own country rather than simply seeking to come to the United States, they’d be satisfied to apply for asylum in some other nearby country; as it turned out, not surprisingly, most simply chose to go home when they realized an asylum claim wasn’t a ticket into the United States.
 
Last edited:
OP
Monk-Eye

Monk-Eye

Gold Member
Joined
Feb 3, 2018
Messages
1,783
Reaction score
327
Points
140
" Latin Americans Maintaining Responsibility For Their Own Subjects "

* Intentional Language Barrier *

It is about natural rights once they are subject to our jurisdiction.
Are you upset this is not an abortion thread?
Do you agree or disagree that the sojourn migrants are subjects of the government of the country from which they originated ?

So the trump administration outsmarted the establishment by setting up refugee locations outside of the united states to control access by foreign subjtects to employee markets available to us corporations by setting up optional locations through social civil agreements between the united states and foreign countries qualifying as capable locations to acquire refugee status .

Who should disagree with the adequacy of such diplomacy on behalf of us citizens ?
 
OP
Monk-Eye

Monk-Eye

Gold Member
Joined
Feb 3, 2018
Messages
1,783
Reaction score
327
Points
140
" As Stated An Ant-Racist Racist Promoting La Raza "

* Attempting Too Fool Know One *

No, only because our extra-Constitutional immigration laws which makes it easier to ask for asylum than just visit through Ellis Island and paying a fee.
That you are simply helping yourself was not ever a disguised , except there were only 32 million from europe and the world in 400 years prior to 1965 - that includes ellis island , whereas 59 million have arrived since then .

Sovereign countries complant with humanitarian standards and more ethnically native should maintain the well being of those displaced .
 

danielpalos

Diamond Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2015
Messages
62,843
Reaction score
2,833
Points
1,855
Location
Alta California, federalist.
" As Stated An Ant-Racist Racist Promoting La Raza "

* Attempting Too Fool Know One *

No, only because our extra-Constitutional immigration laws which makes it easier to ask for asylum than just visit through Ellis Island and paying a fee.
That you are simply helping yourself was not ever a disguised , except there were only 32 million from europe and the world in 400 years prior to 1965 - that includes ellis island , whereas 59 million have arrived since then .

Sovereign countries complant with humanitarian standards and more ethnically native should maintain the well being of those displaced .
It is Your right wing insistence on Immigration laws that is creating the problem. We have no Immigration clause it is an express establishment clause for an uniform rule of naturalization. We should have no illegal problem or any illegal underclass.
 
OP
Monk-Eye

Monk-Eye

Gold Member
Joined
Feb 3, 2018
Messages
1,783
Reaction score
327
Points
140
" Any Presumptive Burden Of Alternative Obligations No Longer Valid - Contrasting 1952 With 1965 At 32 Million Versus 59 Million "

* 32 Million Versus 59 Million *


It is Your right wing insistence on Immigration laws that is creating the problem. We have no Immigration clause it is an express establishment clause for an uniform rule of naturalization. We should have no illegal problem or any illegal underclass.
The United States nationality law is set out in the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (INA) which contains a uniform rule of naturalization of the United States. The 1952 Act sets out the legal requirements for the acquisition and divestiture of U.S. nationality.
The most recent changes to the law were made in 2001.


The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (Pub.L. 82–414, 66 Stat. 163, enacted June 27, 1952), also known as the McCarran–Walter Act, codified under Title 8 of the United States Code (8 U.S.C. ch. 12), governs immigration to and citizenship in the United States. It came into effect on June 27, 1952. In 1965 it was replaced by the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965. Before the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, a variety of statutes governed immigration law but were not organized within one body of text.


* Another Infiltration Banter *

 

danielpalos

Diamond Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2015
Messages
62,843
Reaction score
2,833
Points
1,855
Location
Alta California, federalist.
" Any Presumptive Burden Of Alternative Obligations No Longer Valid - Contrasting 1952 With 1965 At 32 Million Versus 59 Million "

* 32 Million Versus 59 Million *


It is Your right wing insistence on Immigration laws that is creating the problem. We have no Immigration clause it is an express establishment clause for an uniform rule of naturalization. We should have no illegal problem or any illegal underclass.
The United States nationality law is set out in the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (INA) which contains a uniform rule of naturalization of the United States. The 1952 Act sets out the legal requirements for the acquisition and divestiture of U.S. nationality.
The most recent changes to the law were made in 2001.


The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (Pub.L. 82–414, 66 Stat. 163, enacted June 27, 1952), also known as the McCarran–Walter Act, codified under Title 8 of the United States Code (8 U.S.C. ch. 12), governs immigration to and citizenship in the United States. It came into effect on June 27, 1952. In 1965 it was replaced by the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965. Before the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, a variety of statutes governed immigration law but were not organized within one body of text.


* Another Infiltration Banter *

There is no appeal to ignorance of express law.

Are our alleged wars on crime, drugs, and terror real or just fake news, right wing Hoax?

The militia of the State consists of all able-bodied male citizens and all other able-bodied males who have declared their intention to become citizens of the United States, who are between the ages of eighteen and forty-five, and who are residents of the State, and of such other persons as may upon their own application be enlisted or commissioned therein pursuant to the provisions of this division, subject, however, to such exemptions as now exist or may be hereafter created by the laws of the United States or of this State.

To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization,
 

laferia52

Active Member
Joined
Nov 19, 2020
Messages
61
Reaction score
60
Points
33
" Protections Versus Endowment The Two Are Not The Same "

* Fugitives At Large *

by denying due process of law? only the right wing believes in sacrificing the end to the means.
Due process would determined that the parents are SUBJECTS of their country of origin and NOT SUBJECTS of us as such requires a formal agreement that occurs by means of us legal immigration system and therefore the children of illegal migrants are to be given jus sanguinin - citizenship of their parents .
About those foreign children that remain separated from their parents in the USA. The Truth of the matter is that their parents do not want the USA to send them back to them in their home countries. What these parents want is for the US government to allow them to come to the USA and join their children and let them stay in the USA. Those children are their anchor babies. Their entrance tickets to reenter the USA..There was a report in a Mexican news channel where a 14 yr old boy was returned by US immigration to his father in guatemala. His father was really mad.He stated why did the US send his son to him in Guatemala. He said, why didn't the US government not send his son to his brother living in Houston Tx. These people want the USA to help them transport their children to relatives living illegally in the USA.Biden will do just that.Biden will help Human traffickers transport their human cargo to destinations thru out the USA with his CATCH AND RELEASE. Catch them process them and release them to wait for a court hearing. and they can continue on their way. they will spend years waiting for a new immigration reform where all illegals are given legal status and a path to US citizenship.
 

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top