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.
Sen. Ted Cruz tried to get the Senate to consider a measure Thursday providing that any American who joins the fight with terrorist groups such as the Islamic State would immediately renounce their U.S. citizenship, but a Democratic senator objected, saying more time is necessary to weigh the significant constitutional issues it raises.
“It is unfortunate that Democratic senators chose to object to this to prevent this common-sense change in law, and I would note when it comes to the constitutional concerns, I don’t know if anyone in this Senate has been more vigorous or more consistent in terms of defending the constitutional rights of Americans that I have endeavored to be during my short tenure here,” he said. “I will yield to no one in passion for defending constitutional liberties … it is current law right now that if you go and join a foreign nation and take up arms against America, that act has long been recognized as constituting a constructive renunciation of United States citizenship.”
Dems need to stop appeasing dregs for votes! If a person leaves the country to actually kill for an ideology, they need to lose their citizenship INSTANTLY!
THEN Obama can send a drone to take them out without breaking the law!
Sen. Mazie Hirono, Hawaii Democrat, objected, saying the bill has not been brought before the Senate Judiciary Committee and it affects “fundamental constitutional rights, which should be given the full deliberation of the Senate.”
“Legislation that grants the government the ability to strip citizenship from Americans is a serious matter, raising significant constitutional issues,” she said.
Now I am exactly OK with the response... IF there was a timetable put in play for research and a revote... you know a week or two.
Why would this bill be needed? Why is existing law inadequate? I think that running this bill through the judiciary committee and hashing out the issues there is a *much* better idea than passing something in haste and repenting at leisure. Surely the patriot act would have benefited from taking a deep breath and thinking things through.
The Washington Times article mentions that a similar measure was introduced in 2010 by Joe Lieberman and Scott Brown, but failed to mention that Republicans had objected. So they have changed their minds?
"Several Republican officials, though, were skeptical of the idea. Representative John A. Boehner of Ohio, the Republican leader, questioned the constitutionality of the proposal.
“If they are a U.S. citizen, until they are convicted of some crime, I don’t see how you would attempt to take their citizenship away,” Mr. Boehner said. “That would be pretty difficult under the U.S. Constitution.”
It's pretty obvious to anyone who thinks about it for more than two seconds that there are some problems with the idea. Specifically, the idea that the government can do whatever it wants to anyone regardless of constitutional protections by just declaring that the victim isn't a citizen anymore for [arbitrary cause of the day].
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.
