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.
Most countries don't give birthright citizenship to babies born from illegal alien parents and they don't seem to have any problems because of it as the fear mongorers in our country seem to imply. So what's the problem? It won't be retroactive anyway it would only effect those who give birth on our soil after the birthright citizenship clause is clarified as it was intended by the actual wording of it. As you said, it would discourage many illegal aliens from coming here to give birth on our soil. There would be no benefit from it.
Approx 30 countries (mainly in the western hemisphere) have birth right citizenship aka "jus soli" right of soil. So your assertion is wrong. Eastern hemisphere countries mostly use "jus sanguinis" right of blood.
The most recent country in the western hemisphere that made changes to birth right citizenship was the Dominican Republic which was mostly aimed at Haitians and was enacted retroactively. Basically a Haitian would have to have had at least one grand parent who was born in the Dominican Republic to claim DR citizenship which is a burden most Haitians could not meet.
This change was denounced across the world and by the United Nations.
Trump can not unilaterally change birth right citizenship any way so this is not something to be concerned about.
Approx 30 countries (mainly in the western hemisphere) have birth right citizenship aka "jus soli" right of soil. So your assertion is wrong. Eastern hemisphere countries mostly use "jus sanguinis" right of blood.
The most recent country in the western hemisphere that made changes to birth right citizenship was the Dominican Republic which was mostly aimed at Haitians and was enacted retroactively. Basically a Haitian would have to have had at least one grand parent who was born in the Dominican Republic to claim DR citizenship which is a burden most Haitians could not meet.
This change was denounced across the world and by the United Nations.
Trump can not unilaterally change birth right citizenship any way so this is not something to be concerned about.
Correction, there are 195 countries in the world only 30 of them allow citizenship for babies born from illegal aliens on their soil.
I never said that Trump could change birthright citizenship on his own. It has to be brought before the Supreme Court and re-interpreted the way it is actually worded and the intention at the time it was written.
Correction, there are 195 countries in the world only 30 of them allow citizenship for babies born from illegal aliens on their soil.
I never said that Trump could change birthright citizenship on his own. It has to be brought before the Supreme Court and re-interpreted the way it is actually worded and the intention at the time it was written.
And I think only 2 of those countries US and Canada are 1st world and are immigration/migration magnets.
Birthright citizenship became obsolete for America right after the 14th created it mostly and by the 1880s certainly 1924 with the class of illegal codified although it was kind of obsolete the moment it served it's real intended purpose of imparting citizenship on black Americans.
"The reality is this: Repealing birthright citizenship would create a self-perpetuating class that would be excluded from social membership for generations."
__________
Oh joy, fun fun ...
Quote:
Originally Posted by mtl1
That's not an unintended consequence in my book, that's an intended consequence. That way they can't vote and avail themselves of all the benefits of citizenship. Hopefully that will deter many from coming and encourage many to leave.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oldglory
Most countries don't give birthright citizenship to babies born from illegal alien parents and they don't seem to have any problems because of it as the fear mongorers in our country seem to imply. So what's the problem? It won't be retroactive anyway it would only effect those who give birth on our soil after the birthright citizenship clause is clarified as it was intended by the actual wording of it. As you said, it would discourage many illegal aliens from coming here to give birth on our soil. There would be no benefit from it.
Did the two of you bother to read the rest of the page, or just read my excerpt then stop there, because there is more to that ... "Birthright citizenship is not what drives illegal immigration. Surveys have found that people come for jobs and to better their lives. Where problems arise, such as birth tourism by foreigners who come solely to give birth and then leave, existing policy and law enforcement offer the right solution.
So why would we alter a hard-fought, 147-year-old constitutional principle that addressed one of the darkest chapters in our history and has served the country so well?" (I'd like to know)
Here's the other part that I post about and every one chooses to ignore:
"Our birth certificates are proof of our citizenship. If birthright citizenship were eliminated, U.S. citizens could no longer use their birth certificates as proof of citizenship."
Have you all stopped to think about how hard it would be to move from one state to the next, or buy a house, a car, open a bank account ...
"The U.S. government would have to create a large new bureaucracy responsible for determining the citizenship of all children born in the U.S., and would have to create a national registry of citizens and some sort of identification document to be used as proof of citizenship. This would be expensive." (my bold to say, Germany here we come, to be just like you 87 years ago)
We don't have an immigration problem in this country, we have a human rights issue in this country; when the lack of human rights hit you people close to home, then you'll say --- oh wait, we didn't intend that ... by then it will be too late.
"Along with the US, 29 other countries currently bestow automatic citizenship to any individual born within its borders, excluding the children of foreign diplomats or of enemy forces occupying the country. They are:
Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Barbados, Belize, Brazil, Canada, Chad, Chile, Cuba, Dominica, Ecuador, El Salvador, Fiji, Grenada, Guatemala, Guyana, Honduras, Jamaica, Lesotho, Mexico, Pakistan, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Uruguay and Venezuela.
These countries either have legal systems derived from English common law, where the practice of jus soli developed, or instituted the citizenship measure in order to attract people to their countries, such as in Central and South American nations.
<snip>
Have any countries changed their birthright citizenship laws?
Germany, however, has liberalized its citizenship laws slightly in recent years. Whereas citizenship used to be based exclusively on parents' nationality, since 2000 the children of nonethnic German parents may acquire citizenship at birth if at least one of their parents has held permanent residence for at least three years and resided in Germany for at least eight years."
_________________
We will have to like Germany, go through it, before we understand, it was the wrong thing to do. Our rights, is like that of receiving an A in a college course that by the end of the semester an F is scored, because we don't know how to keep the A.
Did the two of you bother to read the rest of the page, or just read my excerpt then stop there, because there is more to that ... "Birthright citizenship is not what drives illegal immigration. Surveys have found that people come for jobs and to better their lives. Where problems arise, such as birth tourism by foreigners who come solely to give birth and then leave, existing policy and law enforcement offer the right solution.
So why would we alter a hard-fought, 147-year-old constitutional principle that addressed one of the darkest chapters in our history and has served the country so well?" (I'd like to know)
Here's the other part that I post about and every one chooses to ignore:
"Our birth certificates are proof of our citizenship. If birthright citizenship were eliminated, U.S. citizens could no longer use their birth certificates as proof of citizenship."
Have you all stopped to think about how hard it would be to move from one state to the next, or buy a house, a car, open a bank account ...
"The U.S. government would have to create a large new bureaucracy responsible for determining the citizenship of all children born in the U.S., and would have to create a national registry of citizens and some sort of identification document to be used as proof of citizenship. This would be expensive." (my bold to say, Germany here we come, to be just like you 87 years ago)
We don't have an immigration problem in this country, we have a human rights issue in this country; when the lack of human rights hit you people close to home, then you'll say --- oh wait, we didn't intend that ... by then it will be too late. Which countries grant unconditional birthright citizenship?
"Along with the US, 29 other countries currently bestow automatic citizenship to any individual born within its borders, excluding the children of foreign diplomats or of enemy forces occupying the country. They are:
Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Barbados, Belize, Brazil, Canada, Chad, Chile, Cuba, Dominica, Ecuador, El Salvador, Fiji, Grenada, Guatemala, Guyana, Honduras, Jamaica, Lesotho, Mexico, Pakistan, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Uruguay and Venezuela.
These countries either have legal systems derived from English common law, where the practice of jus soli developed, or instituted the citizenship measure in order to attract people to their countries, such as in Central and South American nations.
<snip>
Have any countries changed their birthright citizenship laws?
Germany, however, has liberalized its citizenship laws slightly in recent years. Whereas citizenship used to be based exclusively on parents' nationality, since 2000 the children of nonethnic German parents may acquire citizenship at birth if at least one of their parents has held permanent residence for at least three years and resided in Germany for at least eight years."
_________________
We will have to like Germany, go through it, before we understand, it was the wrong thing to do. Our rights, is like that of receiving an A in a college course that by the end of the semester an F is scored, because we don't know how to keep the A.
One parent would have to present a Real ID qualified identification, a passport or a birth certificate when applying for newborns birth certificate. Same amount of work it takes to fly on a plane. What are you talking about?
One parent would have to present a Real ID qualified identification, a passport or a birth certificate when applying for newborns birth certificate. Same amount of work it takes to fly on a plane. What are you talking about?
The person's birth certificate will mean squat. btw: if something is wrong with your chip, your sol.
The Supremes need to get off their rear ends and finally put an end to this "Misinterpretation" of the 14th. "Subject to the jurisdiction Thereof". If I went to Thailand on a tourist visa and had sex with a under aged girl in Thailand I have technically committed a felony because as a U.S. citizen I am bounded by U.S. law and my citizen allegiance is under the U.S. even though I am overseas when I commited the act.
Illegal immigrants are not U.S. citizens and are not under our jurisdiction. Their allegiance is bounded to their country. This seems like a no brainer that should be corrected by SCOTUS.
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.
