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.
Agreed but a person who gets US citizenship should be allowed to own property; legal aliens not so much.
there are thousands upon thousands of foreigners that own US property and which have no disire to live or move to the US. US real property is an investment for many foreigners.
I seriously doubt you can get bankers and realtors to just give up this lucrative market.
I agree but it won't require a constitutional amendment just a re-visit by the SC to determine what the intent of birthright citizenship actually was by the writers of the 14th. Too many politicians especially on the left have a vested interest in not doing so because they won't like the results of that.
what would be the case to come before the USSC which would have them...not re-visit the 14th, but to change the current precident of the 14th?
Money or cost would not be a factor considered since the supreme court rulled against the State of Texas when the state wanted to charge illegal alien children to attend Texas public schools. The Court did not accept the state's contention that educating alien children was a finacial burden for the state.
what would be the case to come before the USSC which would have them...not re-visit the 14th, but to change the current precident of the 14th?
Money or cost would not be a factor considered since the supreme court rulled against the State of Texas when the state wanted to charge illegal alien children to attend Texas public schools. The Court did not accept the state's contention that educating alien children was a finacial burden for the state.
All it would take is for someone to challenge any case where birthright citizenship for a child born of illegal aliens were involved. The court may or may not rule for or against it based on the wording and intent of the 14th Amendment. I would just like to see a case presented and ruled on but it has never happened. At any rate, many countries have "changed" their policies so that at least one or both parents have to be citizens of their country. We could do like wise but there is too much PC and political pandering in today's climate opposed to common sense and the common good of our country.
there are thousands upon thousands of foreigners that own US property and which have no disire to live or move to the US. US real property is an investment for many foreigners.
I seriously doubt you can get bankers and realtors to just give up this lucrative market.
IMO, the countries of those foreigners should have to reciprocate then. Mexico for example does not allow foreigners to buy their land. I don't like the double standards.
how would you accomplish that...push the baby back in??? LOL
Sarcasm doesn't solve the problem. It would just mean that any future births from illegal alien parents born on our soil would not get birthright citizenship nor any of the benefits that go along with it. It would be a deterrent for many illegal aliens to come here in the first place.
Sarcasm doesn't solve the problem. It would just mean that any future births from illegal alien parents born on our soil would not get birthright citizenship nor any of the benefits that go along with it. It would be a deterrent for many illegal aliens to come here in the first place.
I'm open to the idea that the attainment of U.S. citizenship at birth may need to change within the next few decades. However, the assumptions around the "Anchor Baby" term are mostly incorrect. Pew Hispanic has found that illegal alien mothers were already here (at the point of the birth) at least one year 80% of the time, and over five years 50% of the time. It's also more likely that an illegal alien parent has a partner with immigration status or citizenship.
Sponsorship (if it is able to occur at all) requires the "Anchor Baby" to attain the age of 21 years old, have the financial means, and resident requirements, with the parents being qualified to immigrate (there are no quotas, but they need to have served out any applicable ban on illegal presence, and generally no waivers are accepted from the perspective of adult children for their parent(s))...
I'm aware of hundreds of I-601 waivers for the spouse of a U.S. citizen, but I've never heard of a former "Anchor Baby" successfully sponsoring even one parent...
Anchor babies should not sponsor anyone who has been here illegally.
If they want to sponsor spouses who never lived here illegally, that might be another matter but no illegal should be rewarded for having broken the laws.
The requirements of sponsors should be tightened. No sponsors who themselves are on food stamps and Medicaid should be bringing in anyone. All immigrants being sponsored should be provided a good health care insurance plan by their sponsor and the sponsorship financial obligation period should be much longer than it currently is. Also the sponsor should be required to pay into social security or another retirement plan for his or her immigrant unless the immigrant can find a job that will provide this.
Anchor babies should not sponsor anyone who has been here illegally.
If they want to sponsor spouses who never lived here illegally, that might be another matter but no illegal should be rewarded for having broken the laws...
How gracious of you, after you've stated your resistance to a legal immigrant sponsoring an "Immediate Relative" after naturalizing...
Quote:
Originally Posted by malamute
...The requirements of sponsors should be tightened. No sponsors who themselves are on food stamps and Medicaid should be bringing in anyone. All immigrants being sponsored should be provided a good health care insurance plan by their sponsor and the sponsorship financial obligation period should be much longer than it currently is. Also the sponsor should be required to pay into social security or another retirement plan for his or her immigrant unless the immigrant can find a job that will provide this.
You still think that you have a chance to make the rules, when you are already compromised for your bias based on ethnicity...
how would you accomplish that...push the baby back in??? LOL
Uh; say Jan 1st, 2014 was the end of birthright; ANY kid born in the US with 2 illegal alien parents on that day or later would NOT be a US citizen, that kid would also be an illegal alien.
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.
