Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

GOP-led push to end birthright citizenship brewing in U.S. House
The Monitor ^ | November 20,2005 | Daniel Perry

Posted on 11/20/2005 12:51:07 PM PST by Icelander

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-74 next last
To: Wallace T.

I assume you are talking about the technicality I mentioned. I agree that the Constitution says what it says. I think that a reasonable court might have found a way not to intrude in the government's handling of battle field detainees whether they happened to be US citizens or not, but particularly if they happened to be merely technical US citizens and had essentially never lived in the US after their parents moved them out at a young age. Reasonable courts don't put the executive nor the legislature in the position where they might have to reduce our rights to protect the nation.

Lawyers, particularly Supreme Court level lawyers, are suppose to be good at distinguishing cases and isn't the ability to distinguish cases and get the "desired" outcome what makes for famous, well respected jurists? Maybe the Surpreme Court will finally find a way to do this.


41 posted on 11/20/2005 1:54:02 PM PST by JLS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: flashbunny
This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens...

Sounds like this already addressed in the 14th. Amending again won't make any difference if this is already ignored. It will just make another clause to ignore.

42 posted on 11/20/2005 2:16:24 PM PST by arthurus (Better to fight them over THERE than over HERE.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Icelander
GOP-led push to end birthright citizenship brewing in U.S. House

About 30 years overdue...

But better late than never...

It goes without saying that this does not apply to children of two legal native-born citizens...

43 posted on 11/20/2005 2:36:14 PM PST by Publius6961 (The IQ of California voters is about 420........... .............cumulatively)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Icelander

Doesn't sound like such a bad idea. It seems silly to give the newborn automatic citizenship in preference to the parents. It might be tradition, but so is the one remaining reason for the British monarchy. On the other hand, I'm curious about just how much it would affect U.S. immigration.


44 posted on 11/20/2005 2:46:54 PM PST by dr_who_2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Icelander
I agree. I can't understand why such a stupid law - anyone born in this country is a citizen even if the parents are just flying over it or are illegal aliens - has not been changed long ago. There is no good reason whatsoever to support it.
45 posted on 11/20/2005 2:53:50 PM PST by Jane Austen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Icelander

bump


46 posted on 11/20/2005 2:54:19 PM PST by porkchops 4 mahound ("Si vis pacem, para bellum", If you wish peace, prepare for war.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Icelander

That's another goofy provision (constitutional or otherwise). Voters can and should decide for themselves whether a U.S. citizen is sufficiently American or not to hold the office of the Presidency. If you think they'd put some wierdo like Tom Lantos in office, we might as well ban free elections and put the Supreme Court in charge of everything.


47 posted on 11/20/2005 2:54:58 PM PST by dr_who_2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: conservative cat
Why are women coming in when they are that far along?

Well of course it's to do the job's most American's won't do..!

Get with the program...!!

48 posted on 11/20/2005 2:59:34 PM PST by Osage Orange (I'd like to buy Bill Clinton for what he's worth, and sell him for what he thinks he'll bring.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

Comment #49 Removed by Moderator

To: 1_Inch_Group; 2sheep; 2Trievers; 3AngelaD; 4Freedom; 4ourprogeny; 7.62 x 51mm; A CA Guy; ...

ping


50 posted on 11/20/2005 3:18:42 PM PST by gubamyster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gubamyster

Protect our borders and coastlines from all foreign invaders!

Support our Minutemen Patriots!

Be Ever Vigilant ~ Bump!


51 posted on 11/20/2005 3:23:22 PM PST by blackie (Be Well~Be Armed~Be Safe~Molon Labe!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: YouGoTexasGirl
I totally get your angst with being sold out on the illegal alien issue. I too am utterly exasperated with the lack of action and nothing but empty promises that "something will be done" after we get screwed by yet another amnesty for illegals.

It's because of that crap that I made this parody on what to send the RNC when they ask for money. I even released a supersized printer-friendly version for such use.   :o)

52 posted on 11/20/2005 3:28:37 PM PST by Prime Choice (Mechanical Engineers build weapons. Civil Engineers build targets.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Prime Choice

They get a copy of this every time I get a letter for donations.


53 posted on 11/20/2005 3:39:37 PM PST by Icelander (Legal Resident Since 2004)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: Icelander

CITIZENSHIP NEED NOT BE REDEFINED

It is just a problem with immigration law. Just because some kid is a constitutional citizen by being born here, the Constitution does not require you let the whole family in. All that is needed is a change in the statutes not to allow the child's status to prevent deportation of illegal parents. That's not against the Constitution. The choice then to be given them is for the child to stay and be permanently and anonymously adopted by U.S. citizens without disclosure of status or for the parents to renounce in writing the child's U.S. citizenship and take the child back with them. Yes, that is hard-hearted. But what is so complicated about changing immigration law?


54 posted on 11/20/2005 3:44:20 PM PST by UnbelievingScumOnTheOtherSide (Give Them Liberty Or Give Them Death! - IT'S ISLAM, STUPID! - Islam Delenda Est! - Rumble thee forth)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nicmarlo

Way overdue, but better late than never. It won't take the quisling crowd long to attack this as "unfair", "xenophobic" and "racist".


55 posted on 11/20/2005 3:57:18 PM PST by Czar (StillFedUptotheTeeth@Washington)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Icelander
Nathan Selzer, a representative of the Harlingen-based Valley Movement for Human Rights, said he was concerned about the latest anti-illegal immigration move because they were attacks against citizenship. He said passing an immigration reform bill containing a ban on birthright citizenship would create "second-class citizenship."

A ban on birthright citizenship would simply make the child the same nationality as its parents. It would not affect children born to legal resident aliens or to naturalized citizens. It would affect children born to illegal aliens and to people here on temporary non-immigrant visas.

"There's no place for it," Selzer said. "It would require a constitutional amendment and striking one of the best constitutional amendments we've ever had.

I'd love to know why he thinks this is the "best constitutional amendment we've ever had".

"Let's make it clear that everyone is equal under the law."

If that was true, there would be close to zero illegal aliens in this country and employers of illegal aliens would have either been fined or jailed by now.

56 posted on 11/20/2005 3:58:29 PM PST by DumpsterDiver
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JLS
Despite the anti-Mexican faction on here, all us policy is not going to be run on that single issue.

What "anti-Mexican faction" are you referring to? Or are you just blowing hot air for the hell of it?

57 posted on 11/20/2005 4:09:31 PM PST by judgeandjury
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Czar; Borax Queen
Way overdue, but better late than never.

I agree, but as I told BQ earlier, I am cynical this will go anywhere.

58 posted on 11/20/2005 4:09:55 PM PST by nicmarlo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

marker


59 posted on 11/20/2005 4:11:49 PM PST by GretchenM (Hooked on porn and hating it? Visit http://www.theophostic.com .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: nicmarlo
"...I am cynical this will go anywhere."

Yes, I feel the same way. Never under estimate the ability of our Hispandering GOP Big Tent Washington crapweasels to cave at the first whiff of gunpowder from the pro-illegal alien Rats.

60 posted on 11/20/2005 4:15:12 PM PST by Czar (StillFedUptotheTeeth@Washington)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-74 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson