Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Where did you get that idea? Anyone born in a state is automatically a citizen of that State. And, since there is no Constitutional basis for a State to care if someone is from out of state or from out of State, why shouldn't a State consider a resident of that State, a citizen for all intents and purposes?
Where did you get that idea? Anyone born in a state is automatically a citizen of that State. And, since there is no Constitutional basis for a State to care if someone is from out of state or from out of State, why shouldn't a State consider a resident of that State, a citizen for all intents and purposes?
Wow! You are certainly not quoting me.
Seriously, how on earth did you interpret THAT from my posts?
Last edited by Benicar; 01-11-2011 at 12:17 PM..
Reason: Deleted a comment.
Where did you get that idea? Anyone born in a state is automatically a citizen of that State. And, since there is no Constitutional basis for a State to care if someone is from out of state or from out of State, why shouldn't a State consider a resident of that State, a citizen for all intents and purposes?
There are numerous things within a state that you have to prove residency for. Someone born in a state would be considered a citizen, as of now.
Residency needs to be established for a DL, college tuition etc. If you are in the country illegally, you are in the state illegally.
Can you post a link to where in our constitution it says that those that cross our borders illegally are citizens?
Unlike some other posters, I actually have a rational argument instead of unsubstantiated opinions.
Since there is no Constitutional basis for a State to care if someone is from out of state or from out of State, why shouldn't a State consider a resident of that State, a citizen for all intents and purposes?
Unlike some other posters, I actually have a rational argument instead of unsubstantiated opinions.
Since there is no Constitutional basis for a State to care if someone is from out of state or from out of State, why shouldn't a State consider a resident of that State, a citizen for all intents and purposes?
If I cross the border into this country illegally and take up residence in the state of my choice, it would make me a citizen of that state?
Am I paying income tax to that state or just wiring my off-the-books income back to a country south of the border?
Or am I illegally residing in (insert state here) while a citizen of (insert country here.)
Digging around web sites, it appears that one can reside in CT no matter what their immigration status, but they have to establish citizenship through the US Federal Govt.
An oxymoron if I ever heard one, with special emphasis on the moron.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
