Posted on 08/19/2010 5:30:30 PM PDT by Princeverdi
Most people in the United States disagree with the current interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution, which grants automatic citizenship to all children born on American soil, according to a poll by Angus Reid Public Opinion. 55 per cent of respondents would not grant citizenship to children born to foreigner tourists traveling with valid visas.
In addition, 67 per cent of respondents would deny citizenship to the offspring of people who are in the U.S. illegally.
Seventy per cent of Americans think the children of foreigners with legal documentation, such as students or workers with a proper visa, should be allowed to become American citizens.
The Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution reads: “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.”
(Excerpt) Read more at intelligencequarterly.com ...
Hell no.
“the current interperation” This is the problem.
Children born on U.S. soil,AND subject( owe allegiance to )to the jurisidiction thereof are U.S. citizens.
We need to enforce the original intend and remove all politicans that don’t support it.
That definitely includes me.
Like diplomats, illegals nre NOT subject to our laws. The did not obey the law in coming here, they do not legally pay income or social security taxes, etc, etc, etc.
Well, duh...
And another frikin' thing!!! America "denies" citizenship to approximately 95% of the world's population. Just because a few million people invade the country, violating our laws, doesn't give them rights that the other 95% of the world do not have.
Senator Jacob Howard, the author of the citizenship clause in the Fourteenth Amendment, defined who would fall within the “jurisdiction of the United States”:
[E]very 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.
http://judiciary.house.gov/legacy/6042.htm
Since the anchor baby was created by an interpretation of the 14th amendment, I would think it be easier to work on changing the interpretation to one more in line with constitutional principles. I guess the problem is that ruling class has a vested interest in maintaining the flow of illegal aliens which is why nothing gets done.
At least one parent must be in the country legally in order for them to qualify.
If u get out the door with the money...IT”S YOURS!....Cant have double jeopardy
No more anchor babies.
There are many natural born who should have citizenship revoked.
We already have that law!
It’s called getting elected to Congress, gives you the right to steal from the American people, and not be punished if caught.
You can’t deny a right that someone never had.
This is the point, the 14th amendment already provides anchor babies are not citizens. Nothing needs to be changed, like the rest of the immigration laws it just needs to be enforced.
Exactly! American citizenship, or even being allowed to live here, is not some God-given right.
or get 5 SC justices to make a ruling. Seems a lot easier.
or get 5 SC justices to make a ruling. Seems a lot easier.
Thanks Princeverdi.
Well, yeah.
“I would think it be easier to work on changing the interpretation to one more in line with constitutional principles.”
No, we need Strict Constructionists of on the SCOTUS who will read the Constitution and all the amendments as written.
And the 14th Amendment says that all persons born here are citizens and the 2nd Amendment says that we all have the right t
Ping!
ping!
Or insist that the spirit of the 14th Amendment is observed as intended, and not the abortion its become.
We're breathlessly waiting for the rest of your post.
Did you pass out?
I think the percentages quoated are low!!!
I’ve never met anyone that thinks rug rats of illegals should be citizens!
” In addition, 67 per cent of respondents would deny citizenship to the offspring of people who are in the U.S. illegally. “
Even our “dumbed down” Americans get it.
“...subject to the jurisdiction thereof” simply means “Owe ALLEGIANCE to.” That is, someone who wants to come here, assimilate and become an AMERICAN.
All the people need to do is get Congress to pass appropriate legislation, because the Amendment already grants Congress the authority to pass legislation necessary to enforce it. No further amending needed.
Illegal aliens are not “...subject to the jurisdiction thereof...”
Just ask ‘em.
The children of invading barbarians are not and should not be given citizenship.
There has to be a legal standard for that phrase. Foreign diplomats do not qualify legally, even if they "want" to become Americans. "Feeling allegiance to" is not the same as it is to "owe allegiance to". If they come here illegally, there is no official paperwork that says "I commit to becoming American and to owe allegiance to America." They can go right back to their home country anytime they wish and resume being Honduran, or Chilean, or Mexican (child and all!)
Read the debate at the time of enactment of the 14th. The writer SPECIFIED that one only gained U.S. citizenship at birth when his parents were subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, that is, OWED THEIR ALLEGIANCE to the U.S. and to no other foreign power. They were very clear about it. Only due to a footnote in a case for which Brennan wrote the opinion did we gain the abomination we have now. And that only in 1986 or so.
Congress could end the controversy by simple legislation, but of course will not, at least at this time.
There is a legal standard for it. In fact, the American Indian tribes were excluded from birthright citizenship, even though they were here, because they were not totally subject to the Jurisdiction of the United States; they were independent groups, subject to treaties. Diplomats are not subject to our jurisdiction in ANY way, even our traffic laws. Foreign visitors are subject to our LAWS while here, but do not owe their political ALLEGIANCE to the United States, but to their home country. And the same thing applies to illegal invaders. Coming here to steal a job or someone else’s identity or go on welfare does NOT constitute giving one’s ALLEGIANCE to the United States and never has. In face, the Mexicans who come here to do that specifically state (in so many words, in many cases) that they are MEXICAN FIRST, even some LEGALS. There is no intent to give allegiance to the U.S., therefore there is NO BASIS FOR GIVING CITIZENSHIP to any offspring they download while here.
EVERY other continent except Europe and North America would LAUGH if you stated you were a citizen from their country JUST because you were born there.
"I'm a Korean because I was born there" is probably the most stupid attempt at hereditary I can think of.
No wonder the west died.
It gave away its heritage.
If we are going to rely upon the original intent, then this provision only grants citizenship to former slaves and their progeny, who were born in the United States. It does not apply to a child born to foreign national, who is in this Country illegally (or legally).
ORIGINAL Birthright citizenship : Born on American soil to parents who owe allegiance to the United States.
REVISED Birthright citizenship: Anyone born on U.S. soil is a U.S. citizen.
THe liberal/progessive movement has been able to “rewrite” the laws of our nation by repeating the same lies over and over. They didn’t even bother to change the Constitution or pass new laws. This is what they want and we are expected to accept it like good sheeple.
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.