U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Illegal Immigration
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 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.
Jump to a detailed profile or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Business Search - 14 Million verified businesses
Search for:  near: 
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-19-2011, 10:38 AM
 
9,122 posts, read 3,522,454 times
Reputation: 2122
Default 61% Oppose U.S. Citizenship for Anchor Babies

61% Oppose U.S. Citizenship for Anchor Babies

Quote:
A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey shows that 61% of Likely U.S. Voters believe that a child born in the United States to a woman who is here illegally should not automatically become a U.S. citizen. Thatís up slightly from last August but is the highest level of support for a change in the existing law found in five years of Rasmussen Reports surveying.
Quote:
Twenty-eight percent (28%) disagree and feel that children born to illegal immigrants in this country should automatically become American citizens as is currently the practice
Quote:
Eighty-four percent (84%) of voters believe that before anyone receives local, state or federal government services, they should be required to prove they are legally allowed to be in the United States. Only nine percent (9%) oppose such a requirement
Quote:
Most voters continue to feel that the policies of the federal government encourage illegal immigration
Quote:
Seventy-seven percent (77%) of Republicans and 63% of voters not affiliated with either major political party oppose automatic U.S. citizenship for children born in this country to illegal immigrants. Democrats are evenly divided on the question.
Quote:
75% of Democrats are concerned that efforts to identify and deport illegal aliens will violate the civil rights of some U.S. citizens, a view shared by just 39% of Republicans. Unaffiliated voters are narrowly divided on the question.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-19-2011, 10:44 AM
 
Location: Metro West- Boston, MA
9,404 posts, read 3,263,897 times
Reputation: 3570
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-19-2011, 10:48 AM
 
6,486 posts, read 3,050,160 times
Reputation: 1240
I wonder if the libs that whine about how 60% of Americans want same-gender marriage are going to get on this thread and support changing the constitution because of 61% here.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-19-2011, 10:51 AM
 
4,065 posts, read 1,648,109 times
Reputation: 2112
Include me in that 61%. I actually believe that number is low.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-19-2011, 10:54 AM
 
2,866 posts, read 4,110,670 times
Reputation: 1620
If the percentages are that high, then why aren't leading politicians seriously pushing for a constitutional amendment? Talk is cheap, but this issue is going nowhere in D.C., with or without a Republican majority in the House.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-19-2011, 11:16 AM
 
Location: Brooklyn
40,060 posts, read 19,430,492 times
Reputation: 10112
Quote:
Originally Posted by domino View Post
If the percentages are that high, then why aren't leading politicians seriously pushing for a constitutional amendment? Talk is cheap, but this issue is going nowhere in D.C., with or without a Republican majority in the House.
Because politicians have a natural aversion to any issue that sounds like it could come within five miles of "controversial." If you're looking for people with principle, you must look elsewhere.

On the other hand, make it crystal clear to your friendly local Congressman that he hasn't got a chance in hell of being re-elected, and all of a sudden he'll flood your mailbox with flyers proclaiming his full support for whatever it is you happen to believe in.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-19-2011, 11:17 AM
 
Location: Wasilla, Alaska
17,658 posts, read 11,249,082 times
Reputation: 6215
Quote:
Originally Posted by domino View Post
If the percentages are that high, then why aren't leading politicians seriously pushing for a constitutional amendment? Talk is cheap, but this issue is going nowhere in D.C., with or without a Republican majority in the House.
They have done precisely that.

Quote:
Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relating to United States citizenship.
Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled (two-thirds of each House concurring therein), That the following article is proposed as an amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States within seven years after the date of its submission for ratification by the Congress:
Article --

A person born in the United States shall not be a citizen of the United States unless--
(1) one parent of the person is a citizen of the United States;
(2) one parent of the person is an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence in the United States who resides in the United States;
(3) one parent of the person is an alien performing active service in the Armed Forces of the United States; or
(4) the person is naturalized in accordance with the laws of the United States.
Source: S.J.Res 2, Introduced 01/25/2011 by Sen. David Vitter (R-LA).
However, it should be noted that this proposed amendment to the US Constitution has been proposed in every session of Congress since the 1990s and it has never yet reached the floor for a vote. Thus far, Sen. Rand Paul is its only cosponsor. I would not hold my breath hoping this bill will ever see the light of day. It is sitting in the Committee on the Judiciary, and that is where it will die - until the next session of Congress.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-19-2011, 11:24 AM
 
1,777 posts, read 595,753 times
Reputation: 586
Wow, you could read that resolution as saying that if both parents are citizens of the United States, then the person born in the United States is not a citizen.

If you're not a citizen unless one parent is a citizen, that would seem to imply that you're not a citizen if two parents are citizens.

As for the proposed Amendment, I have a hard time getting too worked up with reinterpreting "subject to the jurisdiction" in the Fourteenth Amendment to exclude people in the US illegally. It would be a revision of centuries of precedent that limits that language to children of invading armies or diplomats, but I think you could plausibly say that people here illegally are only subject to deportation, and no other jurisdiction of the US, unless they violate some other criminal law.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-19-2011, 11:35 AM
 
Location: Vermont
7,785 posts, read 4,722,463 times
Reputation: 6808
I'm opposed to citizenship for anchor babies, too.

Of course, it's easy for me to take that position because I know that there is no such thing as an anchor baby. It would be nice if the other posters here would get that straight.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-19-2011, 11:39 AM
 
4,433 posts, read 2,226,630 times
Reputation: 1347
I don't know which of Obama's carnival employees is responsible for listening to the people on this one.

Maybe Eric Holder.

But, I can assure you that whoever it is .... they don't give a damn what the American people think.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $84,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Illegal Immigration

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2014, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 - Top