What should happen to kids of illegal aliens being deported?

[paddymurphy]

The Supreme Court has never ruled on parents who are here illegal.
All of the Court cases was on parents who were not citizens but was here legally.

The Supreme Court has never explicitly ruled on whether children born in the United States to illegal immigrant parents are entitled to birthright citizenship via the 14th Amendment, but it has generally been assumed that they are.
United States nationality law - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Assuming is not the actual facts.
It needs to be taken up with the Supreme Court.

Sure they did. In INS v. Rios they were faced with applying Section 244(a)(1) of the Immigration and Nationality Act which allows the Attorney General to suspend an alien's deportation if the alien has been present in the United States for a continuous period of at least seven years, is of good moral character, and demonstrates that deportation would result in extreme hardship to the alien or to the alien's spouse or child, who is a United States citizen. The facts of this case were:

"Respondents, a married couple, are natives and citizens of Mexico. Respondent husband illegally entered the United States in 1972. Apprehended, he returned to Mexico in early 1974 under threat of deportation. Two months later, he and respondent wife paid a professional smuggler $450 to transport them into this country, entering the United States without inspection through the smuggler's efforts. Respondent husband was again apprehended by INS agents in 1978. At his request, he was granted permission to return voluntarily to Mexico in lieu of deportation. He was also granted two subsequent extensions of time to depart, but he ultimately declined to leave as promised. INS then instituted deportation proceedings against both respondents. By that time, respondent wife had given birth to a child, who, born in the United States, was a citizen of this country. A deportation hearing was held in December, 1978. Respondents conceded illegal entry, conceded deportability, but requested."

Now, if it were not settled law that their child, born to them while they were here illegally, is a US citizen, they had no case. The Supreme Court, however, stated that because their son was a US citizen, the law applied. It is a fact that you cannot dispute that the 1000 or so children who will be born today to illegal aliens will be citizens. Nothing you can do about it.

That is the Eighth Circuit Court
CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE
EIGHTH CIRCUIT
Not the Federal Supreme Court.

You are a moron. Certiorari is to the Supreme Court. This case was decides by the United States Supreme Court. Here is the link. FindLaw's United States Supreme Court case and opinions.

Ok sorry you are right.
It says;
Allows the Attorney General to suspend the deportation of an alien.
You realize that each new President appoints their own Attorney General.
It still needs to be ruled by the Supreme Court on the 14th itself.

It wa ruled on. That is the Point of the ******* opinion. They ruled that the child of these illegal aliens was a citizen because he was born here. If he were not a citizen, the law would not have applied. And a new Attorney GeneraL cannot ignore a Supreme Court ruling.

 

[rhodescholar]

It wa ruled on. That is the Point of the ******* opinion. They ruled that the child of these illegal aliens was a citizen because he was born here. If he were not a citizen, the law would not have applied. And a new Attorney GeneraL cannot ignore a Supreme Court ruling.

The points, asshole, are that the 14th amendment was meant for slaves, not for all of central and south america to walk across the border and pop out a baby so as to collect welfare.

Second, the parents are obviously NOT subject to the jurisdiction of the US since they are illegal aliens, and are subject to their own country's jurisdiction, which is why such things as embassies exist. You're an idiot, who is arguing over a point that has not been directly confirmed by the legislative or judicial branches of the federal government.

 

[red_dirt]

House panel urges Congress to pass Birthright Citizenship legislation | NumbersUSA

Are trespassers "subject to the jurisdiction" of the USA? Can they vote? Do they pay taxes? Are they eligible for the benefits of and liable for the responsibilities of American citizenship? Proponents say, "Yes, all they have to do is get here, by whatever means."
Some courts and all Democrats have said, "Yes." Obama says America belongs to everyone.
Again, the controversial 14th has been used for all sorts of things. It's time to iron out this current application. Considering the politics, easier said than done.

You do realize that the court has already decided what subject to the jurisdiction means? Right.

I assume you are referring to a Supreme Court ruling. What was the name and date on that case, do you know?

Not incidentally, directing public attention to the children is tried and true leftist deception, playing on the emotions
of an unstable, unable to think for itself, public. The media does it all the time. Donald Trump will focus on
upholding the law. That is going to require an overhaul of Immigration and Homeland Security to begin to
undo the damage done by years of oversight and work by that commie tool, Ted Kennedy.

 

[rhodescholar]

I assume you are referring to a Supreme Court ruling. What was the name and date on that case, do you know?

Not incidentally, directing public attention to the children is tried and true leftist deception, playing on the emotions
of an unstable, unable to think for itself, public. The media does it all the time. Donald Trump will focus on
upholding the law. That is going to require an overhaul of Immigration and Homeland Security to begin to
undo the damage done by years of oversight and work by that commie tool, Ted Kennedy.

I like you, unlike most of the posters here, you have brains.

 

[red_dirt]

Thanks for the kind words, rhodescholar, though you needn't have.
Not to pile on, though, newbie that I am, I couldn't help but wonder
at some of the exchanges I have read.
Does improve with time, I hope.

Truthfully, I am still stuck on this "subject to the jurisdiction thereof," clause,
and how that could possibly be construed to mean trespassers are somehow
American subjects. That's why I requested the Supreme Court ruling. cla

Still cannot deny the reality -- enforce the law and the issue goes away. At the
same time, formalize differences between tourists, guest workers, and lawful
citizens.

 

[mudwhistle]

Don't deport illegals, give them a path to citizenship. Unless you pro lifers want to see children go back to bad countries for them.

Sorry.......the United States sucks. We are the greatest threat to peace on Earth.

We'd be doing them a favor by sending them back to their parents' wonderful countries that are of course free of oppression from evil capitalist Republicans.

 

[gallantwarrior]

Keep the families together send the children back with their parents.

But if the kids are older, its wrong to send children to a country they don't know. They might be attending school in the US, why deny them an education? They didn't commit a crime, their parents did.

Keep the families together send the children back with their parents.

But if the kids are older, its wrong to send children to a country they don't know. They might be attending school in the US, why deny them an education? They didn't commit a crime, their parents did.

A shame their parents failed to consider those issues before they decided to break our laws.