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.
I still for one say birthright citizenship clause of the 14th amendment preceded by over 5 decades the legal status of illegal alien, so to say it applies to the children of illegal alien isn't a given. All that should be required is an executive order or law that's passed saying they are not to be granted citizenship.
Otherwise, it would be akin to arguing you'd have to amend/repeal the 2nd amendment to pass one gun law restriction. But liberals never are consistent.
The problem with that argument is that by virtue of being born in the U.S. babies are "granted" citizenship, no governmental action needed. But that doesn't make the mother a citizen. She should be compelled to return to a place where she is a citizen, but given the option of returning with the newborn or without. If she chooses the latter her parental rights should be terminated, since she made the choice of birthing in a country in which she has no right to be present.
The problem with that argument is that by virtue of being born in the U.S. babies are "granted" citizenship, no governmental action needed. But that doesn't make the mother a citizen. She should be compelled to return to a place where she is a citizen, but given the option of returning with the newborn or without. If she chooses the latter her parental rights should be terminated, since she made the choice of birthing in a country in which she has no right to be present.
No, there is nothing in the birthright citizenship clause that deems babies born from illegal alien parents as citizens of our country. It's merely been a PC policy that had deemed them so. This needs to be taken to the Supreme Court and clarified once and for all.
I didn't want to create thread drift on No More Anchor Babies?? so I opened this thread. I have an interesting idea for dealing with the problem of 14th Amendment birthright babies.
I have an out-of-the-box thought; pass a law (not sure if it should be Federal or state-by-state) providing that if a baby is born in the U.S. to two non-citizen parents those parents have two choices; 1) return to their native lands with the baby; or 2) baby is deemed surrendered for adoption to U.S. citizens or legally resident non-citizens, and the parents go back without their children.This seems to be countenanced by law. The 14th Amendment states: Nothing in that Amendment applies to the parents, nor gives them rights. However, the decision in United States v. Wong Kim Ark construes the 14th Amendment to require that babies born in the U.S. are citizens. Thus the conundrum posed by "birthright" or "anchor" babies.
My proposal to give the parents a choice between returning to their countries with their babies or leaving them here but returning themselves isn't as heartless as it sounds. The parents can always keep their children; by returning to where they should be. Remember, the parents created a dangerous situation by deciding to have a baby in a country in which they were not legally present, or if legal, only on a very temporary basis.
I didn't want to create thread drift on No More Anchor Babies?? so I opened this thread. I have an interesting idea for dealing with the problem of 14th Amendment birthright babies.
I have an out-of-the-box thought; pass a law (not sure if it should be Federal or state-by-state) providing that if a baby is born in the U.S. to two non-citizen parents those parents have two choices; 1) return to their native lands with the baby; or 2) baby is deemed surrendered for adoption to U.S. citizens or legally resident non-citizens, and the parents go back without their children.This seems to be countenanced by law. The 14th Amendment states: Nothing in that Amendment applies to the parents, nor gives them rights. However, the decision in United States v. Wong Kim Ark construes the 14th Amendment to require that babies born in the U.S. are citizens. Thus the conundrum posed by "birthright" or "anchor" babies.
My proposal to give the parents a choice between returning to their countries with their babies or leaving them here but returning themselves isn't as heartless as it sounds. The parents can always keep their children; by returning to where they should be. Remember, the parents created a dangerous situation by deciding to have a baby in a country in which they were not legally present, or if legal, only on a very temporary basis.
My best friend was born to parents who were not american citizens at the time of her birth. Her father was a diplomat for a foreign country and her mother was a permanent resident at the time who worked for a major oil company. Four years later by he time her sister was born her mother was a citizen but her father never did because of his job. So she should have been removed from her parents care because of that? What a bunch of nonsense.
She was born here, raised here, works as a public servant, married to another American, has two a,Eric an children of her own and you think that she shouldn’t be allowed her?
My best friend was born to parents who were not american citizens at the time of her birth. Her father was a diplomat for a foreign country and her mother was a permanent resident at the time who worked for a major oil company. Four years later by he time her sister was born her mother was a citizen but her father never did because of his job. So she should have been removed from her parents care because of that? What a bunch of nonsense.
She was born here, raised here, works as a public servant, married to another American, has two a,Eric an children of her own and you think that she shouldn’t be allowed her?
You told us her mother had permanent status. That is not undocumented. I.e. not trespassing. Huge difference.
No, there is nothing in the birthright citizenship clause that deems babies born from illegal alien parents as citizens of our country. It's merely been a PC policy that had deemed them so. This needs to be taken to the Supreme Court and clarified once and for all.
Exactly. How could it deem citizenship on a class of people who didn't exist and were deemed illegal almost 60 years later? An illegal's children born here should have no more status then if born to a diplomat.
My best friend was born to parents who were not american citizens at the time of her birth. Her father was a diplomat for a foreign country and her mother was a permanent resident at the time who worked for a major oil company. Four years later by he time her sister was born her mother was a citizen but her father never did because of his job. So she should have been removed from her parents care because of that? What a bunch of nonsense.
She was born here, raised here, works as a public servant, married to another American, has two a,Eric an children of her own and you think that she shouldn’t be allowed her?
Children born in the USA to persons in diplomatic service to another nation are typically considered citizens of that other country, not the USA. Normally the spouse of a diplomat is also covered by a diplomatic status in the USA, unless she was already a permanent resident of the USA before marriage. That is a complicated situation.
Oh lordy, talk about myopic nonsense. We have Indian friends from Tamil Nadu that are in process of becoming citizens. Their daughter was born here and is an American in every sense. Why should they go back to their country because they had a baby born in America? They're doing everything the right way way and guess what, they're not on welfare. They both work and are going to buy a house as soon as their green cards come in. You can't buy a house here with a mortgage unless you have a green card. One size of simple minded does not fit all.
I didn't want to create thread drift on No More Anchor Babies?? so I opened this thread. I have an interesting idea for dealing with the problem of 14th Amendment birthright babies.
I have an out-of-the-box thought; pass a law (not sure if it should be Federal or state-by-state) providing that if a baby is born in the U.S. to two non-citizen parents those parents have two choices; 1) return to their native lands with the baby; or 2) baby is deemed surrendered for adoption to U.S. citizens or legally resident non-citizens, and the parents go back without their children.This seems to be countenanced by law. The 14th Amendment states: Nothing in that Amendment applies to the parents, nor gives them rights. However, the decision in United States v. Wong Kim Ark construes the 14th Amendment to require that babies born in the U.S. are citizens. Thus the conundrum posed by "birthright" or "anchor" babies.
My proposal to give the parents a choice between returning to their countries with their babies or leaving them here but returning themselves isn't as heartless as it sounds. The parents can always keep their children; by returning to where they should be. Remember, the parents created a dangerous situation by deciding to have a baby in a country in which they were not legally present, or if legal, only on a very temporary basis.
You seem to be trying to fix a non existent problem. The citizenship of the baby has no impact on the immigration status of the parents. Why on earth would you try to cause loss of custody for being an illegal alien? One can of course loss custody for various reason like abusing the baby. But without some rational that the baby's parents are unfit why would you attempt to modify their custody rights?
And one of the parents gets a US visa and returns. You going to give back the kid?
Oh lordy, talk about myopic nonsense. We have Indian friends from Tamil Nadu that are in process of becoming citizens. Their daughter was born here and is an American in every sense. Why should they go back to their country because they had a baby born in America? They're doing everything the right way way and guess what, they're not on welfare. They both work and are going to buy a house as soon as their green cards come in. You can't buy a house here with a mortgage unless you have a green card. One size of simple minded does not fit all.
Who said such a thing? If persons entered and remined under a legal visa, then their child born should assume that visa status, and if parents get permanent legal status their child should get that status too etc.
But if the parents are here illegally the child should assume the same illegal status, and NOT be instantly given the highest form of citizenship possible natural born citizen.
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.
