Skip to comments.Linda Chavez: Immigration restrictionists are stuck on the 14th Amendment
Posted on 01/07/2011 10:19:59 AM PST by moonshinner_09
Americans abhor extremism. It is the reason our democracy has lasted for more than 200 years and why we have rejected both socialism and right-wing radicalism. American political parties have generally hewed to the center, unlike their European counterparts, so that even major political shifts moved the country only from center right (as in the Reagan and Bush administrations) to center left (as in the current administration). It is a lesson that both parties should take to heart, but one that poses special problems for the Republicans as one group of extremists attempts to hijack the GOP on a single issue: illegal immigration.
On the same day as newly elected members of Congress were being sworn to support and defend the Constitution, a group of Republican state legislators were announcing plans to violate both the spirit and the letter of the 14th Amendment. In the name of fighting illegal immigration, some GOP state legislators have announced they will introduce bills in a dozen or more states to deny citizenship to children born in the United States to parents who are not citizens or legal residents.
In doing so, they make a mockery of the rule of law, which they claim to defend.
In the aftermath of the Civil War, Congress passed the 14th Amendment to grant citizenship to freed slaves, and in doing so established, once and for all, the concept of birthright American citizenship.
The language is unambiguous: "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."
The legislators who want to restrict citizenship to those children born to citizens or legal permanent resident aliens point to the "subject to the jurisdiction" phrase as exempting illegal immigrants.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonexaminer.com ...
How can Congressmen like Luis V. Gutierrez who claim to hold dear the Constitution so flagrantly disregard the rule of law?
Obama is a liberal progressive commie Marxist who’s ideology is black liberation theology.. How the Hell is that center-left?
That's the little clause that totally destroys Chavez's argument. If your parents are foreign nationals, and ESPECIALLY if your parents are foreign nationals who are here illegally, then neither they nor you are "subject to the jurisdiction thereof." That only happens by being born to parents who are US citizens, either by being native born, or by naturalisation.
I’m disappointed that Linda Chavez turned out to be just another ethnic tribalist.
No doubt this effort should be putting some fear into the guts of the 30 million anchor babies ~
She wants to import a vast underclass of Mestizo slaves who will worship her the way her Spaniard overclass forces them to do in Mexico. With their voting power she and her corrupt compadres will create a new caudillo ruling power in America, and seize control of the vast wealth created by the white Anglo Saxon Protestants, a people that the robber thug societies created by the Spanish could never compete with...until now, when the weakling offspring of the real Americans let the rubric of "civil rights" cow them into surrendering to the dark criminal forces of Latin America.
Chavez is just a cheap hustler, a Spanish ReConquistador, looking to avenge the humiliating "loss" of North America to the detestable gringos.
I endorse this post 100,000,000,000,000,000,000,000%!
Linda Chavez is one of those pretend conservatives or something?
BTW, what does she mean when she says the country rejected “right-wing radicalism”?? When did this country ever have that?
I totally agree with your accurate analysis of this unwise Latina.
Like most RINOs, Chavez is soft on social issues: immigration and abortion.
What we abhor are liars, ethnic POS pretending to be something else, promoters of the destruction of our culture & Marxism. So Chavez if by 'extremism' you mean that then yes we abhor extremism.
I think her analysis on the 14th amendment will prevail although I do not think there is a precedent case involving anchor babies. Unfortunately, I think that we are stuck with birthright citizenship although I concur with states that will enact laws that will cause a legal challenge.
Her rants about FAIR and opponents of amnesty and enforcement of immigration laws are smear tactics. There are many legitimate reasons to oppose amnesty and favor enforcement of immigration laws.
Bullcrap. America was founded by extremists. There's no need to read a single word after this sentence.
As long as there is a welfare state we MUST not allow the perversion of the 14th amnd to continue.
You nailed it.
Illegal aliens are subject to the jurisdiction of the U.S.-- that's why we can prosecute them for illegal entry or for crimes they commit here. The phrase was put into the 14th Amendment to exclude children of foreign diplomats, who have diplomatic immunity from U.S. laws.
Nope, you're misunderstanding the difference in force of "jurisdiction" between the two examples.
You believe that do you? Then you have never read the opinion of the people who constructed the clause and placed it into the Fourteenth Amendment.
We can prosecute tourists who commit crimes here. Does that mean they give up their foreign citizenship when they step on US soil? I don’t think so.
I would agree that the intended meaning now has been misconstrued and has become what you believe it is. But the original intent was exact opposite.
A foreign national is under the jurisdiction of their own country. Black slaves had no jurisdiction other than the country they were enslaved in. The Fourteenth Amendment was created for them since they were under no other country’s jurisdiction. No tourist or illegal can say that. Or else those multiple foreign (Mexican) consulates that have opened on our soil issuing their own IDs (metricula consular) would have no ability to operate here. They are allowed to exist because illegals are under the jurisdiction of Mexico. Therefore, the Fourteenth Amendment does not apply to them.
Why does anyone call this woman a RINO? She is a flat out open borders loving left wing Democrat, and I have been stuck with her as my Concress Critter ever since the last redistricting!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.