Big surprise. We may not need to change it, merely redifine how it is interpreted.
Posted on 08/13/2010 11:00:01 AM PDT by Free ThinkerNY
PHOENIX (AP) -- Sen. John McCain says he does not support changing the Constitution to end automatic citizenship for children born to illegal immigrants.
The Republican Arizona senator told The Associated Press that despite the current flurry of news stories on the topic and a statement he made last week that was widely interpreted as saying he supported hearings on the matter, he remains unconvinced that such a change is needed.
(Excerpt) Read more at hosted.ap.org ...
I don’t either. The constitution is not the problem, the gov. sitting on its hands is.
How IS this old bastard doing in the polls in Arizona for the primary?
HAve Arizonans recovered their sanity yet and swung towards Hayworth?
I’ll bet a big majority of his constituents disagree with him on this. But when has that ever mattered to Mr Ego?
McLame is really insane.
I would like John, or anyone else for that matter, to tell me why we are the only nation in the world to provide citizenship to the children of illegal immigrants?
Big surprise. We may not need to change it, merely redifine how it is interpreted.
We don’t need to change the constitution we need to write a law defining what was intended by the 14th amendment.
Not for nuthin’, but the constitution doesnt say that, and neither do many of the cases and statutes say it either.
The key phrase is “under the jurisdiction of the US.” Someone who is not a citizen, nor a person here legally, is not under the jurisdiction of the United States.”
If we enforced the laws, as they have been written and codified, we would be all set.
“I don’t either. The constitution is not the problem, the gov. sitting on its hands is.”
The only reason it is a media issue now is because the wage depression lobbyists thought it might be a good hook to bring back “comprehensive” immigration reform. The attitude is, let’s give the yahoos this red meat on the 14th Amendment so we can have our super amnesty.
Not that the public relations types really believe that, but they know decrepit people like Lindsay Graham would believe that. When Graham supported it his face was full of snark, like he found the golden bullet that will subdue us yahoos.
BINGO!
Since there are no first generation slaves alive anymore, the 14th ammendment is unnecessary.
The very nature of politicians, especially this current Leftist crop, is to get around the law by any means necessary, often by simply ignoring it and banking on the fact that We the Sheeple won't notice, or won't care if we do. They need to be shackled to the law, and not given one inch of wiggle room.
Scouts Out! Cavalry Ho!
McCain is such a disingenuous prick.
He knows we’ll never get that border under control as long as we do not utilize interior enforcement, and we do extend perks to the illegal immigrant.
If he had addressed misinterpretation, that would also be helpful, but this guy does not have our nation’s best interests at heart.
He doesn’t bother himself with the finer points of anything that doesn’t conform to his world view.
Arizona, please, I beg of you, for the good of your state and our nation, retire this friend to Ted Kennedy, Hillary Clinton, John Kerry, George Soros, and Vietnam.
The 14th doesn’t allow for automatic citizenship. That SOB Brennan put a footnote in a ruling.
Exactly. The authors of the 14th Amendment stated that citizenship would not automatically be extended to illegal aliens. All that is required is a simple law clarifying that.
Neither does Alan Keys.
>> I don’t either.
What is the point of the concession? Are you in agreement with McCain’s long standing position on immigration?
Yes, based on an author’s comments. That’s all.
Almost as brilliant as the justice that used European case law to buttress his arguments here.
European case law cannot be used to buttress a Constitutionality issue. At least not ours.
The Supreme Court defined "subject to the jurisdiction" so the only way to change that definition is with a constitutional amendment, or by the Court reversing itself on another case.
Any law that contradicts the Supreme Court ruling will be challenged, and most likely overturned on the same grounds.
While we're at it, we can throw in a clarification of "natural born for purposes of eligibility for President of the United States" clause in there.
The irony is that John McCain wasn’t born in the United States, and some Democrats wanted to challenge his eligibility to run for President.
I fear that the republicans are going to f up a golden opportunity over silliness.
The democrats would love to paint us anti-immigrants over the anchor baby issue.
I for one, feel that if someone has risked coming over on a dingy in a storm to have their baby here, then that little person is a citizen if the parents want him to be...
We need good Americans. How better do you start your humble poor life than starting as an American.
What is happening to the mentality on this forum...?
If this is an issue, then save it for after the elections.
This is one time that Ann Coulter needs to STFU and get her facts straight....
Sorry, but I fear we’re going to screw it up in the next 80 days.
>>We don’t need to change the constitution we need to write a law defining what was intended by the 14th amendment.<<<
BINGO!
hearing does not equal change.
McCain = illegals.
Incorrect. The SC ruled that way because there was no existing law. But we know that the activist judges think that they can redefine the meaning of the words in the Constitution any way they want, regardless of the writings and arguments made when the Constitution was ratified or amended.
Gee, what a surprise.
I was talking the other day with a US citizen young woman who had lived in Mexico for several years. She said that Mexican women can go across the border with a day pass to shop.
She said that when they are pregnant and go into labor, they use the day pass to go into the US and go to a hospital to deliver the baby.
When the child is old enough for college, he is a US citizen and sent to the US for school and financial aid.
And so’s his little dummy, Lindsay...
No change to the Constitution is necessary. Properly interpreted, the 14th Amendment does not guarantee citizenship to children of illegal invaders.
a disingenuous prick sitting on a 10+ point lead and a wad of cash.
Sorry, didn’t see your question....Please resend.
Ok....saw your question. I don’t really care to know that we are the ONLY country that grants citizenship to aliens born here. DOn’t even know if that is true.
We’re America. Our country is different. If we had controlled borders, I don’t think this would be an issue.
In fact, I question why we seem to be the only country in the world that doesn’t have controlled borders, or at the very least DOESN’T INFORCE THE BORDERS.
The issue of citizenship for people born here is different.
I have no problem allowing that...but maybe it’s something to debate, I’m willing to hear both sides. But why should the republicans be saddled with being behind this issue now? What’s the point?
The only citizenship issue I care to discuss is our president’s.
Here is the point!
Illegal Immigrants: 4% of U.S. Population, 8% of Births
Friday, August 13, 2010
Advocates for changing American immigration law received new information to fuel their argument that children born to illegal immigrants in the U.S. should not receive automatic citizenship. A study released by the Pew Hispanic Center showed that 8% of the 4.3 million babies born in 2008 (or 340,000) had at least one parent who was an illegal immigrant. Overall, illegal immigrants make up slightly more than 4% of all U.S. adults.
Any child born in the U.S. or on American soil is considered a citizen, according to the 14th Amendment of the Constitution. The amendment states, “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.” Republican U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina has said he might propose a constitutional amendment to change this provision for children of illegal immigrants.
We are being overwhelmed.
I would like John, or anyone else for that matter, to tell me why we are the only nation in the world to provide citizenship to the children of illegal immigrants?
So you want to repeal the entire 14th amendment? You realize that would allow states to infringe on your first, second, fourth, fifth, etc. rights at will? That’s insane!
John McCain has a long time, well known GAMBLING problem! His support and $ come from questionable people with questionable ties.
Mafia ties:
In 1995, McCain sent birthday regards, and regrets for not attending, to Joseph "Joe Bananas" Bonano, the head of the New York Bonano crime family, who had retired to Arizona. Another politician to send regrets was Governor Fife Symington, who has since been kicked out of office and convicted of 7 felonies relating to fraud and extortion.
http://www.realchange.org/mccain.htm
McCain's mafia ties go back further than that ... all the way back to Cindy McCain's mafia connected dad, who launched McCain's career and put him on the nipple of Charles Keating and friends. Cindy's dad took the fall for the mafia over illegal liqour distribution charges and was rewarded with a beer distributorship when he got out of the clink. Cindy's dad also helped the mob do some dirty business in the New Mexico horse racing market back in the day.
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/2008/09/23/mccain_lays_out_bailout_princi.html
McCain Received $100000 From Firm Of Abramoff Notoriety
Feb 12, 2008 ... John McCain has touted his work tackling the excesses of the lobbying industry ... exploring layers of corruption that had allowed Indian tribes to part with tens .... What concerns me more than Abramoff's donations or ...
www.huffingtonpost.com/.../mccain-received-100000-fr_n_86245.html
For McCain and Team, a Host of Ties to Gambling - NYTimes.com
Sep 28, 2008 ... HONING AN IMAGE Senator John McCain, as chairman of the Indian Affairs .....
www.nytimes.com/2008/09/28/us/politics/28gambling-web.html?...
[snip]Stumping in New Orleans in June, McCain continued to distance himself from the Bush administration, claiming he 'supported every investigation' into the government's role regarding the hurricane.
http://photo.newsweek.com/2008/2/photos-a-mavericks-path.slide3.html
Why did McCain celebrate his birthday on a Mobster's Yacht?
http://www.thenation.com/images/mccain.j…
The photograph substantiates reports that in late August, 2006, McCain celebrated his 70th birthday aboard a yacht, the Celine Ashley, rented by A-list con man Raffaello Follieri and his then-movie star girlfriend Anne Hathaway.
Follieri, who posed as Vatican chief financial officer in order to win friends and investments, pleaded guilty Wednesday in a Manhattan district court to conspiracy to commit wire fraud, eight counts of wire fraud and five counts of money laundering.
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080911203146AAYURwZ
The man who wrote the fourteenth’s citizenship clause, Sen. Jacob Howard of Michigan:
“This amendment which I have offered [citizenship clause to the fourteenth amendment] is simply declaratory of what I regard as the law of the land already, that every person born within the limits of the United States, and subject to their jurisdiction, is by virtue of natural law and national law a citizen of the United States.****** This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens,*********** who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the Government of the United States, but will include every other class of persons. It settles the great question of citizenship and removes all doubt as to what persons are or are not citizens of the United States. This has long been a great desideratum in the jurisprudence and legislation of this country.”[10]
http://towncriernews.blogspot.com/search?q=jacob+howard
Why should it matter to him when AZ voters will reelect him regardless.
Only 10? Last Rasmussen poll I saw had him up by 20.
There’s no problem with the Fourteenth Amendment whatsoever.
There’s no need to amend the Fourteenth Amendment whatsoever.
The problem is with elected officials like John McCain, who won’t follow it, or force judges to follow it.
The Amendment does not allow for anchor babies, as most FReepers can easily prove by simply quoting the framers of it verbatim.
But even more importantly, the Amendment DOES protect ALL innocent persons from being killed, and requires the States to protect them and to provide for the equal protection of the laws for EVERY PERSON.
McCain, and the Pauls, and Palin, and Romney, and Huckabee, and most Republican leaders these days ignore that explicit requirement and claim that the states can allow abortion if they want to. They’re pro-choice for States, they’re anti-Fourteenth Amendment, and they’re one hundred and eighty degrees out of phase with their own party’s Reagan pro-life plank.
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.