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 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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-29-2010, 10:40 AM
 
Location: South Bay Native
13,050 posts, read 21,163,651 times
Reputation: 22525

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by rhinestone View Post
I don't think the legal system can support the forced deportation of natural born American citizens.
Citizens don't get deported - illegal aliens, and in some cases even legal immigrants, do - but if they are a minor, and their parents get deported, their parents are entitled to take their US citizen children with them. Their home country most likely considers the child a [insert country of origin] national as they are the offspring of one or two of their own citizens regardless of which country they were born in.

I really see this as a non-issue. If the parent can find suitable accommodations for their citizen children and prefer to leave them behind, then so be it. I as a parent would never opt for something like that, but to each his own. No one is stopping them from taking their kids home with them either.

Where's the "issue"?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Little-Acorn View Post
It almost reminds me of terrorists who hide among civilians while shooting at the troops trying to stop their murders. They hope that, if they create a situation where innocents might be accidentally hurt or killed by the troops, this will prevent the troops from shooting back at all.

These illegal-alien advocates seem to be using the children of the illegal aliens, as tools to prevent the govt from deporting the parents at all.
Bingo. The way children of illegals have been exploited, by the media, by their parents, by special interest groups - all despicable.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-29-2010, 10:43 AM
 
8,317 posts, read 25,099,702 times
Reputation: 9065
First, deport the illegally immigrated parents. Whether they take their children with them or not is their choice. I suspect most parents, if they are responsible at all, will take their born-in-the-US children with them. If they don't, that is why we have social service and adoption agencies. As to those who say that means the government is breaking up families, that's crap. The illegal immigrant is the one who committed the act of breaking up his or her family by immigrating illegally. To use that as an excuse to let illegally immigrated parents stay in this country is like granting amnesty to convicted felons because their incarceration would remove them from their family. Sorry, breaking the law is breaking the law, and when lawbreaking behavior has sad consequences for a family, that is the lawbreaker's fault, not the law itself, nor the people enforcing the law.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-29-2010, 10:44 AM
 
2,086 posts, read 2,102,736 times
Reputation: 872
Send the kids back with their parents. My cousin was deported and had to stay away for 2 years before he was allowed back into the States. He left his child in the U.S. but that was his choice.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-29-2010, 10:53 AM
 
Location: Verde Valley AZ
8,240 posts, read 9,100,976 times
Reputation: 10394
Quote:
Originally Posted by lmkcin View Post
Just becuase you use the term "anchor baby" doesn't mean squat. It's frankly and for the lack of a better word, a stupid argument. Just because you don't like the circumstances of their birth doesn't mean we should go taking away citizenship.

Go read the 14th Amendment, actually I'll just give it to you:

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Section 2. Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.
Section 3. No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may, by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.
Section 4. The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.
Section 5. The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.
As per your own emboldened paragraph...where does it say "And illegal immigrants may come to this country for the purpose of giving birth to babies who will be considered legal citizens so their parents can also stay...and send for all the rest of the family as well"????? It doesn't and yet they do! People somehow manage to use the constitution to fit their own agendas.

That is all....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-29-2010, 11:07 AM
 
17,279 posts, read 24,965,630 times
Reputation: 8519
Quote:
Originally Posted by lmkcin;

Go read the 14th Amendment, actually I'll just give it to you:

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

There's actually a legal argument and fairly robust legal debate around the idea that "AND subject to the jurisdiction thereof" does not apply to children born to foreigners "visiting" the United States or here without consent of the US.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-29-2010, 11:34 AM
 
Location: Chicago
926 posts, read 1,282,545 times
Reputation: 702
Quote:
Originally Posted by 11thHour View Post
The anchor baby allowance needs to be removed. No more anchor babies!!
I don't agree with punishing a child for the crimes of their parent(s). A kid that is born here and resides here has more connection to this country than a country they have probably never even been to. Punish the parents. not the innocent kids.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-29-2010, 11:37 AM
 
Location: South Bay Native
13,050 posts, read 21,163,651 times
Reputation: 22525
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hendu View Post
I don't agree with punishing a child for the crimes of their parent(s). A kid that is born here and resides here has more connection to this country than a country they have probably never even been to. Punish the parents. not the innocent kids.
You don't think the parent has the right to decide where their children should live? Whatever "connection" the child would have with this country, wouldn't their connection to their parents override that?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-29-2010, 11:41 AM
 
Location: Chicago
926 posts, read 1,282,545 times
Reputation: 702
Quote:
Originally Posted by DontH8Me View Post
You don't think the parent has the right to decide where their children should live? Whatever "connection" the child would have with this country, wouldn't their connection to their parents override that?
Of course the parent should decide whether or not to take their kid with them, but my post was in response to removing the "anchor baby allowance" from the Constitution. Kids born here should have citizenship.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-29-2010, 12:21 PM
 
Location: CITY OF ANGELS AND CONSTANT DANGER
5,409 posts, read 11,070,242 times
Reputation: 2244
the parents should take their kids. the younger ones of course. the older ones (13 and up) might have trouble adjusting, but if they want they can stay with family, or friends.
in the end what i think will happen is that these kids might leave, but theyll be back when they are 18 or able and then they will petition to legalize their parents.

we get rid of them now, but theyll be back. legally.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Little-Acorn View Post
Liberals are coming up with weirder and weirder statements as they face the American people's opposition to the amnesty they want to grant to illegal aliens who have broken our immigration laws.

The latest one comes from situations where a husband and wife from another country, enter the U.S. illegally, and then have one or more babies while they are here. They then get caught by ICE and slated for deportation. The kids they had here, are American citizens as our laws are currently interpreted, and of course the government cannot deport such kids.

Then comes the weirdness: Liberals are demanding, what do "WE" do with those kids?

As mentioned, of course, the government has no power to do anything with those kids... nor should they have. The parents are the ones who will decide what will happen with their own kids, of course, not the government. How could it be otherwise?

Obviously, the choices are (a) the parents take their kids with them when they return to their original country, or (b) the parents leave the kids here, in the country of the kids' citizenship, hopefully with trusted friends, family etc. It's a terrible choice to have to make.

But where do our esteemed brethern of the southpaw persuasion, get the idea that it is "WE" (that's liberal-speak for "the government") who should decide what happens with the kids???

I know that leftists often take the attitude that is Government doesn't do something, nobody will do it. That's weird enough, but at least we're used to it. But this one breaks new ground.

Those parents who entered the country illegally, knew the law called for their deportation, and that it would happen as soon as they were caught. Then, incredibly, they brought children into that world, deliberately and knowingly subjecting those kids to being deprived of either their parents, or the land of their birth and citizenship.

What on Earth possessed those parents, to subject their own children to such a cruel choice? Are these people INHUMAN? How can they do that to their kids?

Now they are stuck with that choice - one they saw coming a long time ago. What are their plans? What did they intend to do with their kids, if/when the law caught up to them as they always knew it might?

The question is not, "What are we going to do with their kids?".

The question is, "What are THEY going to do about THEIR OWN kids?".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-29-2010, 12:22 PM
 
79 posts, read 79,802 times
Reputation: 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by OhioIstheBest View Post
We could strip them of their citizenship. They should have never been granted it in the fist place,

Who are you to strip the citizenship from a child born in the USA?
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 $104,000 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
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, 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, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top