Posted on 12/04/2007 11:29:33 AM PST by yorkie
If only Congress were worth one lousey cuss this could be forever fixed....
As usual, Sleepy shows up to spread disinformation.
Still telling us that kiddies born to Mexican moms in Border Patrol detention are The Real Americans?
Maybe you should try studying up on the concept of jurisdiction...as you know, it's more than territorial...but you won't tell the Rubes that while trying to run your game, now will you?
So if you get arrested in Mexico, does that mean you are a Mexican?
A better question to ask is: which government, if not a state government or the US federal government, has jurisdiction over an illegal alien present on US soil?
Only if you were born there.
Again, my argument is not that illegal immigrants are citizens, but that persons born on US soil are citizens.
They're not - they are simply stating if there is no proof of concurring citizenship on the part of the parent, they will not issue a birth certification to a child as a citizen of that state. If, then, it's a Fed issue, the Fed can issue a birth certification, which puts the illegal parent in closer contact with the CORRECT enforcement authority.
I think my about page may have been read by someone from Arizona...;-)
What the state could say...and we’d all get into trouble for agreeing...is that NO alien females will be allowed into the US, period....and crack down heavily on just females. It sends a bad message...but we wouldn’t have any more birthright situations in the US if we did this.
In the best of worlds, passage would immediately be taken to the Supreme Court, where any sane debate would determine the amendment not appicable to parents with no tie to the USA other than financialy needing the USA.
Meaning, any US earned funds sent to a third country by individuals already on track for citizenship (jurisdiction) should disallow the cert (the kid can apply later)- that should apply also to green cards who are not well into the process of naturalization. (I'd add provision for a need based / event specific exemption if it were properly requested and approved).
Anyone not holding any documents should be disallowed and deported.
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.
Just because someone is subject to US jurisdiction does not mean that he is a citizen.
But if he is either born or naturalized in the US and is subject to US jurisdiction, then he is.
It is clear that illegal aliens are subject to US jurisdiction - otherwise, the US would not be able to enforce its own laws within its own borders.
Their children in the US are also subject to US jurisdiction and if they born here they are citizens, meeting both of the core requirements for citizenship established in the 14A.
http://www.heritage.org/Research/LegalIssues/upload/95590_1.pdf
You might be able to make the case that the child of illegals is not "subject to the jurisdiction" of the US, but rather subject to the jusisdiction of the parent's country. I believe this is how they apply the law to the children of Ambassadors of foreign countries etc who are born here.
Can they be arrested?
Why not, it would make a good court case for review of the 14th which was wrongly decided before.
“How are the children of illegal immigrants, those who aren’t supposed to be here,
“subject to the jurisdiction thereof”?
A person who is born on US soil neither intended to visit, or to earn money.
At the age of one minute old, he is wholly indifferent to the blandishments of tourism and employment.
It's not even the right question.
The “subject to the jurisdiction” provision must therefore require something in addition to mere birth on U.S. soil. The language of the 1866 Civil Rights Act, from which the Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment was derived, provides the key to its meaning. The 1866 Act provides: “All persons born in the United States, and not subject to any foreign power, excluding Indians not taxed, are hereby declared to be citizens of the United States.”[3] As this formulation makes clear, any child born on U.S. soil to parents who were temporary visitors to this country and who, as a result of the foreign citizenship of the child’s parents, remained a citizen or subject of the parents’ home country was not entitled to claim the birthright citizenship provided by the 1866 Act.
FROM:From Feudalism to Consent: Rethinking Birthright Citizenship
by John C. Eastman, Ph.D
Whenever an illegal is prosecuted for a crime in the US, the nearest Mexican consulate must be informed because the person is still subject to the jurisdiction of Mexico. It seems that they may not be wholly under US jurisdiction after all.
See Medellin v. Texas. The ICJ ruled that the US could not enforce the sentence the court imposed on Medellin because the Mexican Consulate was not notified of his arrest.
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.