State lawmakers preparing citizenship legislation (no citizenship to children of illegals)

Associated Press ^ | 10-20-10 | PAUL DAVENPORT and AMANDA LEE MYERS

[Justaham]

Lawmakers in at least 14 states are collaborating on proposed legislation to deny U.S. citizenship to children of illegal immigrants, according to lawmakers, including the sponsor of Arizona's 2010 law targeting illegal immigration.

"We're taking a leadership role on things that need to be fixed in America. We can't get Congress to do it," Republican state Sen. Russell Pearce, of Mesa, said Tuesday. "It's a national work group so that we have model legislation that we know will be successful, that meets the constitutional criteria."

The efforts by the state legislators come amid calls to change the U.S. Constitution's 14th Amendment, which grants automatic citizenship to U.S.-born children of illegal immigrants. Supporters cite costs to taxpayers for services provided to illegal immigrants and their children.

Pennsylvania state Rep. Daryl Metcalfe, the founder of a national group of legislators critical of illegal immigration, said the 14th Amendment "greatly incentives foreign invaders to violate our border and our laws." He had a news conference Tuesday in Harrisburg, Pa., on the multistate endeavor.

The effort could run afoul of the language in the 14th Amendment and lead to a court battle over the constitutionality of the law. But Metcalfe said providing birthright citizenship to children of illegal immigrants is an "ongoing distortion and twisting" of the amendment.

Metcalfe's office said lawmakers in at least 12 other states besides Arizona and Pennsylvania said they were making their own announcements about working on the citizenship legislation. Those other states: Alabama, Delaware, Idaho, Indiana, Michigan, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, Oklahoma, Texas and Utah. Legislators from a total of 41 states are involved in a Metcalfe-founded group concerned with immigration issues.

[Niuhuru]

His family is also exploiting him. He’s being used to get checks and benefits that should go to him alone. but they are mooching off of him, including his extended family that decides to go along for the ride.

[B4Ranch]

“WHAT IS A PATRIOT?”

PATRIOTS are not “Revolutionaries” trying to overthrow the government of the United States.

PATRIOTS are “Counter-Revolutionaries” trying to prevent the government of the United States from overthrowing the Constitution of the United States. - Unknown Author

What brings the PATRIOTS out of the woodwork?

When the constitutional process, the system of checks and balances set up by the Founders, has not just been thrown out of kilter, it has been thrown out the window. These socialist maneuvers are what attracts PATRIOTS to the streets of America.

[SunkenCiv]

Thanks Justaham.

[mlo]

"Actually, it doesn't. It has been misinterpreted for decades."

Actually, it does. Those claiming misinterpretation are misinterpreting it.

[TheOldLady]

Yes! The more states we can get to enact this common-sense legislation, the more we can cut the slithery legs out from under the creeping fascism that has gone so far in this country.

Just say NO to a commie takeover of America.

[B4Ranch]

>>are not a drain on society.<<

Please explain your definition of this “not a drain on society.”

[longtermmemmory]

I think it is akin to those who interprit the yellow fringe on american flags and being an issue inside a courtroom. it is meaningless. Born in the USA and you are a citizen.

History and the reason for that amendment support that plain meaning.

[Locomotive Breath]

Once they turn 18 and are adults in their own right, they can go back “home” and come in the FRONT door like all the other LEGAL immigrants.

[ForGod'sSake]

Thanks Civ; BFL.

[chilltherats]

This will be a repeat of the AZ anti-illegals law. States should simply pass these laws and completely ignore the feds, including their lawsuits. Don’t even respond or file answers to them. Really, when you think about it, what can they do about it without starting a civil war?

[IYAS9YAS]

The original intent of the 14th was not to confer citizenship on just anyone who happened to be born here. http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=llcg&fileName=073/llcg073.db&recNum=11

Middle column, bottom third of the column. "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."

[HiJinx]

Ping!

[mlo]

"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."

The sentence is imprecise. It's the written record of what someone said, and sometimes people speak loosely. If you read "aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors...." as the expansion of "foreigners", then that is correct. If you read each element "foreigners", "aliens", "who belong to the families..." as separate and definitive, then it's not correct.

Fortunately, we don't have to rely on this sentence. It is not law. It's a speech. The actual meaning of "under the jurisdiction" is settled law and it has a known meaning. It does not exclude children of aliens, legal or otherwise.

"Under the jurisdiction" covers anyone who is not a foreign diplomat or invading soldier. In other words, anyone who is subject to the "jurisdiction" of our laws, as diplomats and soldiers are not. Illegal aliens and their children, are.

[dalereed]

“Suppose someone was born in the U.S. and lived here his whole life. Do you really want to deport him because his parents are illegal?”

Absolutely yes!!!

[IYAS9YAS]

A single comma does not change the meaning there. This person was clearly meaning to disclude certain folks. Read the third column. While it may be a speech, and there may be established law, the clear intent here was to not recognize these folks as citizens of the United States. Yes, they may be subject to our laws, and protected by them, but they were in no way to be considered citizens.

Established law also states that babies may be murdered in the womb.

[Razzz42]

Well, at least some of the State are trying to fight back against Congress and their own State representatives that are suppose to represent their own State(s).

[alexandria]

States should simply pass these laws and completely ignore the feds, including their lawsuits. Don’t even respond or file answers to them. Really, when you think about it, what can they do about it without starting a civil war?

They could (GASP!) no longer send them federal benefits.

[W. W. SMITH]

Come on MLO and Longtermmemmory, you have both been here long enough to have read the arguments and know that the fourteenth does not grant citizenship to the children of illegals.

The writers of the fourteenth in private correspondence and interviews explicitly state that it applies only to the children of those who where once held as slaves in this nation. I doubt that there are any left that meet those requirements.

Any child born of illegal parent or parents is also an illegal. If by hook or crook he or she stays through high school, maybe even college, tuff. they along with their parents should be deported.

Upon arrival in the country of origin of the parents, the child can report to the US embassy and barring a criminal record be put at the top of the list for entry to the US. Their having been here illegally will not be held against them but will be against their parents. They will then have to satisfy the same requirements as any other immigrant to become a citizen.

Their parents can not come here to visit. Nor can green cards be issued to relatives.

Any one saying that the fourteenth grants citizenship to any one born here is shilling for the progressives.

[W. W. SMITH]

Illegal aliens and their children, are.

They are not. MLO you are wrong!

[Kellis91789]

They already HAVE citizenship — of whatever country their parents are citizens.

Offering them some sort of short-cut to US citizenship because their parents are criminals makes no sense. You say the kids have done nothing wrong, but they are FAR from ideal candidates for citizenship. They were, after all, raised by criminals in a household that did not value American laws. Every child learns its sense of right and wrong from its parents, and these children are necessarily deficient in that sense.

They should be rounded up and sent home along with their parents. Their parents should be barred from ever applying for a return to the US because they are KNOWN CRIMINALS. Their kids should not be held liable for their parents crimes, but all that means is that they can wait in line with their fellow countrymen, and given no special preference just because their parents were criminals barred from ever visiting the US again. In fact, they should be denied any way to visit the US that is not tied to an intent to become a legal citizen — no student visas or tourist visas, only a work visa where the employer has posted a million dollar bond — because their upbringing in the US would make it to easy for them to overstay a visa and disappear into the population.