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.
The writers of that amendment never intended for them to be instant citizens. The Supreme Court should take another look at it and see where they have erred in their judgement.
Not supported by any history or claims by the writers.
The 14th Amendment was to guarantee citizenship to those born within our borders and those who go through the naturalization process.
Nothing more, nothing less.
It was born, however to allow blacks who were slaves to gain citizenship due to the North Winning the Civil War.
Because blacks were not considered citizens but property at the time, the writers of the amendment needed to legalize their status and making them citizens. Their children could be afforded citizenship at birth.
However, nothing prevented these slaves from returning back to their home country if they chose to do so.
So, by your definition, the slaves were using their children as "anchor" babies as well.
OK all of you Europeans from Poland, Italy, Germany, Ireland, British, etc., etc., etc., I want to hear one big WHOOSH as you and your mother, father, grandfather and grandmother, great great grandfather and mothers exit the USA. All were nothing but anchor babies except the ones who came over on a boat, and those came here illegally too. The only ones who are here LEGALLY are AMERICAN NATIVES. Your ancestors stole the USA Land from them. Aren't you happy now? If YOUR ANCESTORS would never have come here in the first place, there wouldn't be any problems now. Your ancestors are the ones who caused all of these problems in the first place, I hope you're happy with yourselves. American Natives NEVER asked you to come here. Neither did Mexicanos who were living here in New Mexico and Texas before you.
I was sworn to
Quote:
unhold ?
the constitution of the United States?
I wasn't sworn to enfore ICE laws, that task rests with the CBP, and not individual states or the Military, again, that is Federal Jusidiction.
Go ahead, turn your backs on Hispanics and see what happens at the voting booths.
Thank goodness the framers of our Constitution were LIBERALS.
The 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution reads in part:
"All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and the State wherein they reside."
Babies born to illegal alien mothers within U.S. borders are called anchor babiesbecause under the 1965 immigration Act, they act as an anchor that pulls the illegal alien mother and eventually a host of other relatives into permanent U.S. residency.
The 14th Amendment was ratified in 1868 to protect the rights of native-born Black Americans, whose rights were being denied as recently-freed slaves. In 1866, Senator Jacob Howard clearly spelled out the intent of the 14th Amendment by writing:
"Every person born within the limits of the United States, and subject to their jurisdiction, is by virtue of natural law and national law a citizen of the United States. This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the Government of the United States, but will include every other class of persons. It settles the great question of citizenship and removes all doubt as to what persons are or are not citizens of the United States. This has long been a great desideratum in the jurisprudence and legislation of this country."
The original intent of the 14th Amendment was clearly not to facilitate illegal aliens defying U.S. law at taxpayer expense.
This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the Government of the United States, but will include every other class of persons.
Okay... this says only that children born to foreign diplomats are not included.
Please... where exactly is that 1965 Immigration Act provision for "anchor babies?"
Exactly?
If I understand it correctly, and I am not a constitutional scholar by any means, don't even pretend to be . . . the loophole is the term "subject to the jurisdiction thereof", do you agree?
Opponents argue that the native country has an allegiance on the anchors, and therefore, automatic US citizenship is not a granted right.
The greatest threat of the 1965 provision was that the anchors can sponsor other family members when they reach the age of 21.
Evidently, this has not been thoroughly and consistently challenged in the courts because of the greater want for votes and cheap labor.
"This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the Government of the United States, but will include every other class of persons. "
The original intent of the 14th Amendment was clearly not to facilitate illegal aliens defying U.S. law at taxpayer expense.
Quote:
Originally Posted by HistorianDude
Okay... this says only that children born to foreign diplomats are not included.
Who pretends they did not already know that?
It reads:
"...will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners,..."
"... will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are aliens,..."
it also says:
"...will not, of course, include persons in the United States...who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers ..."
It actually says, "foreigners, illegals, and families of ambassadors or foreign ministers". It does NOT say that ONLY children born to the last two groups are not given automatic citizenship. It includes ALL the groups mentioned.
OK all of you Europeans from Poland, Italy, Germany, Ireland, British, etc., etc., etc., I want to hear one big WHOOSH as you and your mother, father, grandfather and grandmother, great great grandfather and mothers exit the USA. All were nothing but anchor babies except the ones who came over on a boat, and those came here illegally too. The only ones who are here LEGALLY are AMERICAN NATIVES. Your ancestors stole the USA Land from them. Aren't you happy now? If YOUR ANCESTORS would never have come here in the first place, there wouldn't be any problems now. Your ancestors are the ones who caused all of these problems in the first place, I hope you're happy with yourselves. American Natives NEVER asked you to come here. Neither did Mexicanos who were living here in New Mexico and Texas before you.
I was sworn to the constitution of the United States?
I wasn't sworn to enfore ICE laws, that task rests with the CBP, and not individual states or the Military, again, that is Federal Jusidiction.
Go ahead, turn your backs on Hispanics and see what happens at the voting booths.
Thank goodness the framers of our Constitution were LIBERALS.
Oh, boy another clueless one living in the past. You say you are sworn to honor the constitution of the U.S. and yet those very ones who framed it came here "illegally" according to you. Now that's funny.
I see, so to enforce our immigration laws is turning one's back on Hispanics? WTH? What does that say about Hispanic citizens that they will punish the politicians at the voting booth for not allowing entry into our country by their ILLEGAL ethnic group? Just who is their loyalty to? Doesn't appear it is to this country and its laws.
We already have treaties with those whose tribes were indigenous to the USA. The Mexican's tribal ancestors were not indigenous to this country and not only that but most of them have that white conquerors European blood coursing through their veins just like many other Americans. So they should talk! Mexican's country is Mexico, not the USA.
Last edited by chicagonut; 05-23-2010 at 07:22 PM..
Author of Arizona immigration law wants to end birthright citizenship - Yahoo! News (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ynews/20100521/pl_ynews/ynews_pl2192 - broken link)
"The author of Arizona's immigration law told constituents he wants to pass another measure to invalidate citizenship granted to the children of illegal aliens."
This man should run for President.
I wish we could draft him! I think we may be on a roll here.
Certainly the message is getting out that the majority of U.S. citizens are ready for illegals to leave.
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.
