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.
You should probably do your research before you make yourself look stupid.
From my source (The IRS, who I would assume is more of an authority than you are)
U.S. Citizen:
An individual born in the United States.
An individual whose parent is a U.S. citizen.*
A former alien who has been naturalized as a U.S. citizen
An individual born in Puerto Rico.
An individual born in Guam.
An individual born in the U.S. Virgin Islands.
In other words, if you're born in the USA, citizenship is conferred upon you at birth.
If you're born in some US territories, you may be a national, but not a citizen.
If you're born in the USA proper, PR, Guam or the USVI you are a citizen and a national.
More reading on the subject if you're still feeling herp derp about it:
The following shall be nationals and citizens of the United States at birth:
(a) a person born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof;
(b) a person born in the United States to a member of an Indian, Eskimo, Aleutian, or other aboriginal tribe: Provided, That the granting of citizenship under this subsection shall not in any manner impair or otherwise affect the right of such person to tribal or other property; When “citizens” move their domicile outside of the territorial limits of the “state” to which they are a member and cease to participate directly in the political functions of that “state”, however, they become “nationals” but not “citizens” under federal law. This is confirmed by the definition of “citizen of the United States” found in Section 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment.:
I can't believe I have to explain basic civics to you.
The IRS? LMFAO Again from your first line in your posted IRS link: A general summary of U.S. immigration terminology follows. So you lay claim with a general summary as some all defining inept claim.
Now lets look at 1401(a). I see "and subject to the jurisdiction thereof", which means they (1) must be born in the US and (2) must be born subject to, as Justice Gray states in WKA, the parents must owe allegiance at the time of the birth. Illegal aliens and their offspring do not owe allegiance at any time.
Believe me, you don't need to explain anything to me, you need to re-evaluate how our system and laws work, and then you need to understand them.
Last edited by Liquid Reigns; 07-04-2012 at 08:48 AM..
The IRS? LMFAO Again from your first line in your posted IRS link: A general summary of U.S. immigration terminology follows. So you lay claim with a general summary as some all defining inept claim.
Now lets look at 1401(a). I see "and subject to the jurisdiction thereof", which means they (1) must be born in the US and (2) must be born subject to, as Justice Gray states in WKA, the parents must owe allegiance at the time of the birth. Illegal aliens and their offspring do not owe allegiance at any time.
Believe me, you don't need to explain anything to me, you need to re-evaluate how our system and laws work, and then you need to understand them.
You can argue all day that you don't like birthright citizenship, but you obviously can't argue that you understand how it works.
You can argue all day that you don't like birthright citizenship, but you obviously can't argue that you understand how it works.
You haven't even shown how you think it works, you just make the claim that it is as you say. I have argued how it works and that I do understand it. I love it when people, such as yourself, haven't a clue as to what they are actually arguing. I will repeat my original comment here: Anchor babies are assumed to be legal citizens, at best they might be US Nationals. This saying goes towards everybody, everybody within the USA is assumed to be here legally, everybody is assumed to be residents within the state they reside, everybody....etc. It is all ASSUMED. The only defining item that makes one a Citizen or not is a Passport stating such or Naturalization papers. So please, re-attempt to make your argument if you think you can actually prove anything. Cite references showing your claim: anchor babies are legal citizens
What is in fact hilarious, is that both you and I know that you can not, simply because there is no proof you can show.
Last edited by Liquid Reigns; 07-04-2012 at 11:59 AM..
You haven't even shown how you think it works, you just make the claim that it is as you say. I have argued how it works and that I do understand it. I love it when people, such as yourself, haven't a clue as to what they are actually arguing. I will repeat my original comment here: Anchor babies are assumed to be legal citizens, at best they might be US Nationals. This saying goes towards everybody, everybody within the USA is assumed to be here legally, everybody is assumed to be residents within the state they reside, everybody....etc. It is all ASSUMED. The only defining item that makes one a Citizen or not is a Passport stating such or Naturalization papers. So please, re-attempt to make your argument if you think you can actually prove anything. Cite references showing your claim: anchor babies are legal citizens
What is in fact hilarious, is that both you and I know that you can not, simply because there is no proof you can show.
Other than the proof I've already shown that if you are born in the US you are a citizen? How frickin dense are you?
Why don't you try to prove your point and show me a case where someone born in the USA was deemed a non-citizen because their parents were illegal aliens?
Other than the proof I've already shown that if you are born in the US you are a citizen? How frickin dense are you?
So you failed English growing up, nothing you have shown has proven anything. Not your IRS link, not your 1401 claim, not even your USCIS link. Birth on US Soil (from your USCIS link) is but one requirementto be considered a US Citizen, it is not the defining of US Citizenship. Now lets learn you something, it is the FAM (Foreign Affairs Manual) that defines who is considered Citizens based on the interpretation (of 1401 and required documents - NOTE the s on documents.) of the ruling party at the time.
His birth certificate says he was delivered unto Weslaco 38 years ago, and church records say he was baptized here soon after. School files list him as a student in the local district from kindergarten through high school, and voter rolls show he votes for president here.
But to the U.S. State Department, all that black and white looks a lot like gray. It recently refused to issue Mr. Aranda a passport; the government isn't sure he's an American.
"I never imagined my U.S. citizenship would be questioned," says the manager at a water company. "I've lived here since the day I was born."
The problem is that Mr. Aranda was delivered by a midwife at a private home....."Usually a state-issued birth certificate is sufficient to establish U.S. nationality," says Michael Kirby, a senior official for consular affairs at the State Department.
LOUISVILLE, Ky. (AP) — According to the federal government, two sisters in rural Kentucky do not exist.The women weren't born in a hospital, never went to public school and only recently obtained birth certificates after they sued the state.....The births were recorded in a family Bible that has been marked up through the years, but some of the changes and deletions didn't pass muster with the Kentucky Office of Vital Statistics, Benge said.That led the women to sue for a birth certificate. In 2009, Laurel County Circuit Judge John Knox Mills ordered DNA testing to prove the women were the children of American citizens. On Feb. 19, 2010, Mills ordered the state to issue birth certificates.....In what Benge described as a desperation move, the women tried to get U.S. passports with their birth certificates. They met the same results.
They actually had to have blood tests to prove they were the children of the parents as required from a Federal Judge.
Maybe you "ascriptive" idealists could explain these two instances, imjusayin
As for being frickin dense, I would suggest you say that while you look in the mirror.
Quote:
Originally Posted by quigboto
Why don't you try to prove your point and show me a case where someone born in the USA was deemed a non-citizen because their parents were illegal aliens?
I have proven my point, the only known case of an immigrant giving birth within the US and the child being recognized as a US Citizen is WKA. Justice Gray made it clear that his parents were here with the authority of the US Government at the time of his birth, and by such authority his parents owed allegiance to the US and it was passed down to WKA, thus making him a US Citizen by birth.
Now attempt prove what you think. (This oughta be good for a round of LOL)
Last edited by Liquid Reigns; 07-04-2012 at 12:31 PM..
If you're born in the US, you are a citizen at birth. There is no process you have to go through (Unless your parents are diplomats or part of an occupying military force)
If people don't like that law, they should say so, and set out to change it via the processes available to the American people, rather than make the false claim that these anchor baby voters are "illegals"
All the food stamps, Medicaid, WIC coupons, Section 8 housing vouchers, clothing allowances --- AND -- a pass around the immigration laws of this nation. So much better than working hard for a living back home where there is no big government rewards simply for giving birth to babies you cannot afford, and so much easier than the legal process which obviously illegals believe is for suckers.
the problem just isn't the anchor babies and the free ride for medical care that illegal immigrant women get (they actually have a special program in florida to pay for the hospital bill for these births), it is also just flat out fraud with all these free riders:
"We were being told by upper management to ignore fraud, to assign ITIN numbers and ... pay out refunds to people who are lying," Howard explained. "It's a license to steal when you allow that."
Howard and five other tax examiners at the ITIN processing center in Austin all told WTHR the same thing: for years, IRS managers have instructed them to "look the other way" while processing ITIN applications that appear to be filed fraudulently – even when those applications contain clear signs of criminal activity.
For example, Howard received a stack of ITIN applications for dozens of children attending the same school in South Carolina. (Adult tax filers can request an ITIN for a child if they want to claim that child as a dependent in order to get child tax credits and a larger tax refund.) When he researched that school, he discovered it didn't even exist. When Howard reported the apparent scam to his bosses, he claims his managers ordered him to approve the applications anyway.
"C'mon. This is fraud! Those kids weren't even real and I'm supposed to give out [ITIN] numbers?," Howard recalls asking. "We're tax examiners but the truth is we're not supposed to look into anything. We're not supposed to examine anything. It's like an assembly line. It's just ‘Get it out of here. Boom. Boom. Boom. Get it out of here and don't worry about the fraud. Fraud slows us down.'" (end quote)
i certainly don't feel very enthused about the 4th of july this year, because i can see how bad things are getting in this country.
we are all being robbed, and the government has not only cast a blind eye on the robbery-it actually makes you pay to be robbed.
who will protect you when the government fails you??????????
...it is also just flat out fraud with all these free riders:
Quote:
...For example, Howard received a stack of ITIN applications for dozens of children attending the same school in South Carolina. (Adult tax filers can request an ITIN for a child if they want to claim that child as a dependent in order to get child tax credits and a larger tax refund.) When he researched that school, he discovered it didn't even exist. When Howard reported the apparent scam to his bosses, he claims his managers ordered him to approve the applications anyway...
Can you tell me where it has information about where a child applicant will go to school?
Let's also be clear, an ITIN applicant, in particular a child, may not be an illegal alien or breaking any laws...
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.
Again from your first line in your posted IRS link: A general summary of U.S. immigration terminology follows. So you lay claim with a general summary as some all defining inept claim. 
