Skip to comments.Sens. Paul, Vitter introduce citizenship resolution
Posted on 01/27/2011 11:49:26 AM PST by Free ThinkerNY
Two Republican senators are introducing a resolution that would end the constitutional right to citizenship that comes with being born on U.S. soil.
Rand Paul (Ky.) and David Vitter (La.) are introducing a resolution this week that would amend the Constitution so that a person born in the United States could only become an American citizen if one or more of his or her parents is an legal citizen, legal immigrant, or member of the armed forces, according to a joint press release Thursday.
Vitter said the legislation would help reduce illegal immigration.
For too long, our nation has seen an influx of illegal aliens entering our country at an escalating rate, and chain migration is a major contributor to this rapid increase which is only compounded when the children of illegal aliens born in the U.S. are granted automatic citizenship, Vitter said. Closing this loophole will not prevent them from becoming citizens, but will ensure that they have to go through the same process as anyone else who wants to become an American citizen.
Paul said the legislation enforces the current immigration rules.
(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...
Make it retro active too!
If a child of a legal immigrant is a citizen, that gives permanent residence to the immigrants. I say no to this one. The child should only be a citizen of the country the parents immigrated from.
Bet they all have birth certificates!!!!!
The proposal will need the support of 38 state legislatures and there is no way that will ever happen.
That's an outright lie. They did no such thing.
Their law merely clarifies the conditions under which birthright citizenship is granted, something completely allowed for in the text of the 14th.
I was hoping Rand Paul was smarter than this. This ‘constitutional amendment’ will go the way of the ERA, on the historical trash dump of failed amendments with the idea. I guess he is the same Rand Paul who thought Maddow was his friend. His dad Ron loves to come up with lots of ideas that are DOA too.
We don't give automatic citizenship to children of diplomats. Why is this so hard to understand?
more than can be said for obama...
I’m sure both Vitter and Paul understand that this proposal is only symbolic and has no chance whatsoever of being approved.
A lot of liberal heads are going to explode over this legislation.
Here is a trick to defeat the liberal argument that anybody who opposes birthright citizenship is a racist.
Ask your liberal: Would you and your wife or husband go to a foreign country illegally, have a child, then demand that you and your children should be granted citizenship just because your children were born on foreign soil?
And even if you were a foreign country legally, wouldn’t you demand your children be recognized as being Americans instead of the foreign country they were born in?
A prime technique for bringing down an existing social order is to OVERLOAD and OVERWHELM the governmental systems, creating economic and social chaos. Whats going on today straight out of Saul Alinskys Handbook for Radicals. Because we have NOT sent home 20 million illegals, WE NOW HAVE THE FORMER AND ARE CLOSING IN ON THE LATTER. BOTH parties have been applying those methods, but Obama, who studied those methods under Bill Ayers while a so-called community organizer, is using ALL the gadgets in the radical toolkit. If it continues much longer, YOUR kids are doomed to life as serfs in a nation that will more resemble Nazi Germany or the old USSR than the America the Founders ATTEMPTED to leave us.
A member of our family is an OB/GYN who took her pre-med at HAAAAVVAAAAADDD! Needless to say, she emerged from that experience a LIBERAL. (She stopped catching babies and went into research when her malpractice premiums began to exceed her annual earnings.)
Upon completing her medical training at yet another liberal university, she interned at a hospital near the border in Kahlifonia.
It was there that a mystical transformation took place: She began to connect the heavy deductions from the slave wage GROSS EARNINGS for which she busted her butt for as many as 72 virtually sleepless hours in a row with the taxis and jalopies regularly sliding to the curb in front of the ER.
Many of them contained pregnant illegals who won the race to deliver their babies HERE. She caught many of those anchor babies who, under the current — and COMPLETELY ERRONEOUS —interpretation of the 14th Amendment were IMMEDIATELY NEW AMERICANS. The mother who, obviously, could not care for the child if she were back in her native land — could not be deported now even if the INS and the political bosses WANTED her deported (which, because these illegals can generally be counted on to vote the liberal line, they DO NOT). And as the mother of a new US citizen, the woman could remain here for about as long as she cared to and that was usually for life.
(NOTE: For a short, Readers Digest version of the ORIGINAL intent of the 14th Amendment, go here: http://pocusa.info/NLArchive22_14thAmndt.html . For a more comprehensive explanation of the events surrounding the amendment, go here: http://www.14thamendment.us/index.html )
Most of those patients were welfare recipients and the deliveries were charity cases: The bill for the hospitals and HER services were routinely spread over the bills of those who DO pay. And what the other users of those facilities don’t cover went back to the taxpayers.
And since my family member was now a taxpayer, they were costing HER.
And while she may not exactly be a libertarian, today she has come a long way from Harvard.
And just so the bleeders who might see this dont think me some sort of ethnocentric bigot, I submit this problem is MORE than just about illegals.
Before my oldest daughter was born at University Hospital in Cleveland in 1967, I sat in the main lobby as welfare mother-to-be after welfare mother-to-be waddled through the door to the maternity ER for THEIR free deliveries.
Before WE could take OUR daughter home, I had to cough up over 3 grand. And that was a great deal of dough in 1967, especially for a guy whod just finished a 4 year turn in the USAF.
As I wrote the check, I remembered the magazine article Id recently read by a hospital administrator from Massachusetts who admitted that all US hospitals practiced a form of medical Marxism, spreading the costs of care for indigents over the bills of those who DO pay for care. Given the move to socialism here, it probably will never be otherwise: Not counting Byzantine complexity and confusion, government produces and has — NOTHING unless it first takes it from some PERSON. SOMEBODY ALWAYS PAYS.
The illegals have been using the emergency rooms of our hospitals for their health-care, almost always at no charge to them. That cost is either spread over other users or the taxpayers. We have seen a national epidemic of hospital closings due to their insolvency, much of it caused by the burden of trying to render care to PEOPLE WHO SHOULDNT EVEN BE HERE, denying care to native-born citizens who normally pay their bills and their taxes. And, I submit, the drain the illegals impose on the welfare system is a major reason for our national insolvency. (Thank you grubby progressive, power-hungry politicians and bureaucrats!)
Look, I have a big enough problem paying for the 3rd and 4th generation slackers and welfare bums who were BORN here.
Its time we stopped paying for those who were not.
While they’re at it, why don’t they put forth a new law which REQUIRES the complete vetting of ALL potential Presidents, including putting the onus on each candidate to provide PROPER and IRREFUTABLE evdience that they are, in fact, NATURAL BORN U.S. CITIZENS, as the Constitution REQUIRES?
It needs 67 votes in the Senate, 288 votes in the House and 38 state legislatures. Good luck.
Like they would really obey the US Constitution but... The US Government cannot make law retro active.
Article 1, Clause 3, Section 9 of US Constitution.
“...No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.”
The author of this article is either a liar or an idiot. First, legislation cannot AMEND the Constitution. That statement alone show complete ignorance of our constitutional government... and his BOZO reports for The Hill!
Second, you are right this LEGISLATION is only rewriting citizenship requirement to overturn a SCOTUS opinion (which really wasn't a majority opinion).
The crime here is that the people of the US do not know that the scam of citizenship perpetuated by illegals crossing the boarder to have child has been sponsored for 30 years by Congress that has failed to act. Congress has repeated the lie or ignorance of the constitution, just like this boneheaded author, that birth place is the right of citizenship.
Even worse. Then they shouldn't be proposing it at all until a Federal law doing the same is passed, signed and is ruled unconstitutional. They do damage setting a constitutional amendment as the fence height to climb over.
This sort of thing really annoys me because it's counter-productive. When this fails then what? Dead end!
Legislation, like that introduced in the House is the way to go. Admitting this is a constitutional problem is asinine.
At least the House, anyway.
Is an Amendment to the Constitution really necessary to fix this? Or could we do the same thing with a simple, one-sentence act of Congress that clarifies the clause in question?
The 14th Amendment states “... and subject to the jurisdiction thereof ...” which pretty much eliminates illegal aliens, IMHO. If the illegal alien parents are “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States, then require all of them to report to their nearest courthouse, first thing tomorrow morning.
What’s that you say? They won’t appear because they’ll be subject to immediate arrest and deportation? Well then they obviously aren’t “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States. Neither are their kids, ipso facto.
I don’t think it’s necessary to go through the whole Amendment rigamarole for a simple clarification. And if the Supreme Court rejects the clarification, screw ‘em. The states are the final arbiter of Constitutionality, not the court.
That is at the heart of what America and the world is facing. That view requires constant publication and an effective response.
The world is watching a race between the socialists (et al) and the moslems, anti-Americans and anti-freedom lovers all. Each movement is using population bombs and it does not presently appear there is any effort to slow or stop them.
Can't post the article due to copyright issues. Protestors already screaming...Arizona will now be known nationwide for persecuting illegals...OH! WAIT!
This could put a stop to Chinese baby tourism...Chinese couples actually book trips here so that their children can be born in the US and get citizenship. They only stay a week or two.
Yes I know, I was being facetious.....though Clinton got away with it on his tax increases.
so what happened to this one?
“Steve King Moves Forward on Bill to End Birthright Citizenship “
You only need 12 states to oppose the amendment and states with little or no illegal alien problem will oppose as will states that have signifcant Hispanic populations since politicians in those states do not want to lose Hispanc votes.
You'll notice the trolls who show up on BC threads show up on threads like these too.
Anything that might jeopardize their boy in office must be poo pooed quick.
Governor Bobby Jindal’s parents were citizens of India when their son was born in the U.S., just four months after they arrived.
He is touted as being a possible Presidential candidate.
Or just enforce the border and this is more or less a mute point.
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.
Senator Jacob Howard,
co-author of the citizenship clause of the 14th Amendment, 1866.
We don't know for sure if this is true about Paul since it doesnt quote any of his statements, only Vitter’s. His office didnt seem to know.
I find libertarian's like Ron Paul frustrating sometimes because they seem to live in an imaginary world much like liberals do. Both deny human nature. Here's a example : Let's legalize crack and crystal meth and just let the future addicted die in the streets without any government intervention. Idea's like these come from those that live in Peter Pan imagination land. The Federal government now makes me pay to be covered for free female chest Xrays in Obama-care insurance mandate but someday drug addicts will cost taxpayers nothing when the government cuts them alloff(what about in jail??). Idiotic.
This must go deeper than just birthright citizenship. All of section 1 of the 14th amendment has been abused to impose leftist judges’ social views on the nation. A more comprehensive solution would be a constitutional amendment restoring the original meaning of section 1 of the 14th amendment as a provision meant only to prevent government-based race discrimination.
Moreover, any constitutional amendments to restore the Constitution face the hurdle of getting two-thirds vote in Congress. We must first amend the amendment process itself to eliminate the unnecessary convention now required by Article V and permit States to directly initiate amendment proposals. This will break the current de facto federal congressional and judicial monopoly on interpreting the Constitution, and permit grassroots patriots on the state level to restore the Constitution by amendment. See http://www.timelyrenewed.com
Well said! That is at the heart of what America and the world is facing. That view requires constant publication and a prompt, effective response.
The world is watching a race between the socialists (et al) and Islam, anti-Americans and anti-freedom lovers all. Each movement is using population bombs and it does not presently appear there is any effort to slow or stop them. In this regard, Ann Rand foresaw civilization submitting to savagery.
It would be about time they ended this travesty of giving citizenship to illegals.
It's a matter of ideology, not understanding (like so many other issues the courts have foisted on us).
What's Vitter and Paul's problem with this issue? Drug use?
As the bill is written, since Jindals parents were here legally he would be a citizen.
Cite clinton... if taxes can be raised retro actively... so can this!
It may not be as bad as you think. The “womens’ rights” forces put all their political eggs into amending the Constitution but I don’t think the same mechanism applies here. Obviously they won’t amend the Constitution, but they can still theoretically pass a simple law that clarifies “subject to the jurisdiction.”
I don’t think such a bill would pass the current Dem-controlled senate, but maybe in 2013....
And then the SCOTUS would have to decide.
A good start....though the Dems and Liberal RINOs will try to kill it
Even more interesting.....Rand Paul...who tends to be more Liberatarian than Conservative....seems to not share the Liberatarian mantra of Open Borders and Illegal Alienism.
I still think the best way to handle the birthright citizenship in regard to Illegals is to either keep the child and deport the parents.....or all (baby, mother, family) go home. Stop allowing the mother and the family to stay after she downloads a baby in the US
You are correct.
Yeah they would...if it was a constitutional amendment.
Logically, you're 100% right, but we know many states are run by "progressives". The sole purpose in life for most wooden headed progressives is to "do good" with other people's money. They wouldn't think of taking these illegals into their own home, or even into their own communities, but in their world it's "immoral" not to make them citizens just because they managed to evade the border patrol and sneak into the USA.
I agree introducing an amendment is just a pointless distraction.
Rand Paul is right most of the time but he doesn’t strike me at all as a savvy politician, remember how he let Chris Matthews headbutt him.
Jindal is a citizen regardless since any new law wouldn’t be retroactive.
I’ve never said he isn’t a citizen. His parents were resident aliens, here legally with intentions to become naturalized citizens when their son was born here.
But he isn’t a Natural Born Citizen (born in the U.S. to U.S. citizen parents).
He is now a Governor. He can be a Representative of the House of Congress, or a Senator of Congress. He just isn’t eligible to be President.
Is there case law that says children of illegal aliens born in the US are citizens or is that just policy
If illegal aliens or lawfully immigrated aliens or non-immigrant aliens leave the US are they still subject to its laws and jurisdiction?
Can a US citizen be prosecuted for sex with a minor in a foreign country even if it is not against the law in that country? Can an immigrated, non-immigrated or illegal alien who leaves the US to such a country be prosecuted under US law for same?
So does that mean that non-immigrated aliens and illegal aliens ar not subject to the jurisdiction of the US when abroad like US citizens and LAPRs? So how can their children born in the US be citizens if their parents are not fully subject to US jurisdiction?