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.
Be careful when referring to law. What you may "believe" to be law isn't actually true.
Look at CURRENT US Nationality Law. I'm specifically referring to subsections (a) and (b) in the following linked CURRENT Federal Law. If "everyone" born in the US were actually automatically US citizens via the 14th Amendment, subsection (b) would be redundant and would be neither included nor necessary:
The following shall be nationals and citizens of the United States at birth:
(a) a person born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof;
(b) a person born in the United States to a member of an Indian, Eskimo, Aleutian, or other aboriginal tribe: Provided, That the granting of citizenship under this subsection shall not in any manner impair or otherwise affect the right of such person to tribal or other property
You need to understand WHY that specific legal exception had to be made for a child of at least one US-born Indian (Native American), Eskimo, Aleutian, and other US aboriginals to understand WHY not all those born in the US are automatically US Citizens.
(Hint: It's because they are born subject to a foreign sovereign entity. So are legal AND illegal aliens' children, but no legal exception has ever been made for them as was made for the US-born children of US-born aboriginals in the Indian Citizenship Act of1924 - LONG after the ratification of the 14th Amendment.)
The so-called "anchor babies" and babies born in the US to one US citizen parent and one foreign parent are political policy citizens only, not actual legal citizens.
Interestingly, there are different rules for children of one US citizen and one foreign parent born abroad, in subsection (g):
(g) a person born outside the geographical limits of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is an alien, and the other a citizen of the United States who, prior to the birth of such person, was physically present in the United States or its outlying possessions for a period or periods totaling not less than five years, at least two of which were after attaining the age of fourteen years
But there is no such legal provision made for those of the same circumstance born in the US, except for the child of a US-born aboriginal. Go ahead and read the entire law; I posted a link. It is quite clear. You may think it's flawed, but NO steps have ever been taken to correct it.
The so-called "anchor babies" and babies born in the US to one US citizen parent and one foreign parent are political policy citizens only, not actual legal citizens..
The SCOTUS and every single court we have would say differently.
I suppose you will next tell us we really don't have to pay income tax - and that we come from alien seeds...and that the earth is 10,000 years old.
The very basics of having reason and logic entail accepting the world as it is. Sure, it's fine to attempt to change it, but believing in superstition just doesn't work.
Your "truth" is like another one I can point out. Since my car is made up of molecules - I should be able to steer it into another car and just drive right through it with no harm done. After all, these things are just electrons spinning in space. Atoms.
"Political Policy"? You mean the one that has been in existence since the founding of our country? Sure - then - you are 100% correct. Penalties for drugs, murder, theft, etc. - they are ALL political policy. So is tax policy.
We live in a political entity called the United States of America. Therefore ALL of our laws and our Constitution are political constructs.
Where you go very wrong is your assumption that such constructs are to be judged and decided as to their worthiness by each of 320 million people. They are not. If you'd like to test this theory, go rob a bank. The Constitution does not mention you cannot rob a bank.
Be careful when referring to law. What you may "believe" to be law isn't actually true.
Look at CURRENT US Nationality Law. I'm specifically referring to subsections (a) and (b) in the following linked CURRENT Federal Law. If "everyone" born in the US were actually automatically US citizens via the 14th Amendment, subsection (b) would be redundant and would be neither included nor necessary:
The following shall be nationals and citizens of the United States at birth:
(a) a person born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof;
(b) a person born in the United States to a member of an Indian, Eskimo, Aleutian, or other aboriginal tribe: Provided, That the granting of citizenship under this subsection shall not in any manner impair or otherwise affect the right of such person to tribal or other property
You need to understand WHY that specific legal exception had to be made for a child of at least one US-born Indian (Native American), Eskimo, Aleutian, and other US aboriginals to understand WHY not all those born in the US are automatically US Citizens.
(Hint: It's because they are born subject to a foreign sovereign entity. So are legal AND illegal aliens' children, but no legal exception has ever been made for them as was made for the US-born children of US-born aboriginals in the Indian Citizenship Act of1924 - LONG after the ratification of the 14th Amendment.)
The so-called "anchor babies" and babies born in the US to one US citizen parent and one foreign parent are political policy citizens only, not actual legal citizens.
Interestingly, there are different rules for children of one US citizen and one foreign parent born abroad, in subsection (g):
(g) a person born outside the geographical limits of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is an alien, and the other a citizen of the United States who, prior to the birth of such person, was physically present in the United States or its outlying possessions for a period or periods totaling not less than five years, at least two of which were after attaining the age of fourteen years
But there is no such legal provision made for those of the same circumstance born in the US, except for the child of a US-born aboriginal. Go ahead and read the entire law; I posted a link. It is quite clear. You may think it's flawed, but NO steps have ever been taken to correct it.
You're totally correct. This PC policy only of making birthright citizens of children of illegal aliens needs to end as it is in direct conflict with what the 14th Amendment actually reads and meant.
The SCOTUS and every single court we have would say differently.
But they haven't. Interesting, no?
Quote:
I suppose you will next tell us we really don't have to pay income tax - and that we come from alien seeds...and that the earth is 10,000 years old.
No, I'm merely commenting on the actual law. Did you read it? I posted a link to it. Everything I said is true. Look up the Indian Citizenship Act of 1924. Had to be added LONG (more than 50 years) after the ratification of the 14th Amendment, otherwise US-born children of US aboriginals were not US citizens.
Eight percent of all U.S. births (approximately 350,000 a year) come from at least one illegal-alien parent, according to the Pew Hispanic Center.
There is also a national-security component to the issue, as illustrated by the case of one child in this category: Anwar al-Awlaki, the American-born cleric who became one of al-Qaeda's top operational planners of terrorism.
Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa) has introduced H.R.140, the Birthright Citizenship Act, which would end the practice by requiring that at least one of the child's parents be a U.S. citizen or legal permanent resident. Sen. David Vitter (R-La.) has introduced a companion bill in the Senate, S.301.
...
Awlaki was born on April 22,1971 in Las Cruces, N.M. to non-immigrant parents while his father was studying as a foreign student in the United States. He left the United States with his parents when they returned to Yemen but later re-entered the United States, using his American passport, where he became spiritual mentor to several of the 9/11 hijackers before returning to Yemen and becoming a senior al-Qaeda operative. Awlaki was killed in a U.S. drone strike on Sept. 30, 2011.
The Birthright Citizenship Act, H.R. 140, would amend the Immigration and Nationality Act - not the Constitution - to consider a person born in the United States "subject to the jurisdiction" of the United States for citizenship at birth purposes if the person is born in the United States of parents, one of whom is: (1) a U.S. citizen or national; (2) a lawful permanent resident alien whose residence is in the United States; or (3) an alien performing active service in the U.S. Armed Forces.
Eight percent of all U.S. births (approximately 350,000 a year) come from at least one illegal-alien parent, according to the Pew Hispanic Center.
There is also a national-security component to the issue, as illustrated by the case of one child in this category: Anwar al-Awlaki, the American-born cleric who became one of al-Qaeda's top operational planners of terrorism.
Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa) has introduced H.R.140, the Birthright Citizenship Act, which would end the practice by requiring that at least one of the child's parents be a U.S. citizen or legal permanent resident. Sen. David Vitter (R-La.) has introduced a companion bill in the Senate, S.301.
...
Awlaki was born on April 22,1971 in Las Cruces, N.M. to non-immigrant parents while his father was studying as a foreign student in the United States. He left the United States with his parents when they returned to Yemen but later re-entered the United States, using his American passport, where he became spiritual mentor to several of the 9/11 hijackers before returning to Yemen and becoming a senior al-Qaeda operative. Awlaki was killed in a U.S. drone strike on Sept. 30, 2011.
The Birthright Citizenship Act, H.R. 140, would amend the Immigration and Nationality Act - not the Constitution - to consider a person born in the United States "subject to the jurisdiction" of the United States for citizenship at birth purposes if the person is born in the United States of parents, one of whom is: (1) a U.S. citizen or national; (2) a lawful permanent resident alien whose residence is in the United States; or (3) an alien performing active service in the U.S. Armed Forces.
That would solve the problem I talked about in my OP in this thread. Such persons would then be born-US citizens instead of born foreign nationals, as they actually legally now are.
Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa) has introduced H.R.140, the Birthright Citizenship Act, which would end the practice by requiring that at least one of the child's parents be a U.S. citizen or legal permanent resident. Sen. David Vitter (R-La.) has introduced a companion bill in the Senate, S.301.
SO "diaper" vitter and rabid King introduced a bill? What does that mean? Lots of bills are introduced.
We don't have to pay income tax.
We didn't go the moon.
and so on...
Currently, the "Russian Anchor Babies" that are staying in Trump and other properties in Sunny Isles Florida are American Citizens.
My suggestion is for you to contact the POTUS and see if you can get him to lead an effort to stop this type of abuse of our system. This is BIG National Security.....a KGB Agent or relative of Putin or other oligarchs can - and, in fact, ARE - having "American" children. Just imagine how many tens of thousands of them are going to infiltrate the next generation or two...
I'm very far left but even I would support a change to the system - ideally a clarification in the US Constitution because that is the only way it would stick. I am not anti-immigrant at all...I just believe in immigration reform (like sane Republicans and Democrats have been trying to do for 15+ years) - and also for more qualification for citizenship than just dropping a child inside the lines.
My suggestion is for you to contact the POTUS and see if you can get him to lead an effort to stop this type of abuse of our system. This is BIG National Security.....a KGB Agent or relative of Putin or other oligarchs can - and, in fact, ARE - having "American" children. Just imagine how many tens of thousands of them are going to infiltrate the next generation or two...
I'm very far left but even I would support a change to the system - ideally a clarification in the US Constitution because that is the only way it would stick. I am not anti-immigrant at all...I just believe in immigration reform (like sane Republicans and Democrats have been trying to do for 15+ years) - and also for more qualification for citizenship than just dropping a child inside the lines.
The Constitution doesn't need to be clarified. It is what it is. US Nationality Law has been enacted exactly pursuant to such. I posted a link to the law, and explained quite clearly why what some believe to be true, actually IS NOT.
Be careful when referring to law. What you may "believe" to be law isn't actually true.
Look at CURRENT US Nationality Law. I'm specifically referring to subsections (a) and (b) in the following linked CURRENT Federal Law. If "everyone" born in the US were actually automatically US citizens via the 14th Amendment, subsection (b) would be redundant and would be neither included nor necessary:
The following shall be nationals and citizens of the United States at birth:
(a) a person born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof;
(b) a person born in the United States to a member of an Indian, Eskimo, Aleutian, or other aboriginal tribe: Provided, That the granting of citizenship under this subsection shall not in any manner impair or otherwise affect the right of such person to tribal or other property
You need to understand WHY that specific legal exception had to be made for a child of at least one US-born Indian (Native American), Eskimo, Aleutian, and other US aboriginals to understand WHY not all those born in the US are automatically US Citizens.
(Hint: It's because they are born subject to a foreign sovereign entity. So are legal AND illegal aliens' children, but no legal exception has ever been made for them as was made for the US-born children of US-born aboriginals in the Indian Citizenship Act of1924 - LONG after the ratification of the 14th Amendment.)
The so-called "anchor babies" and babies born in the US to one US citizen parent and one foreign parent are political policy citizens only, not actual legal citizens.
Interestingly, there are different rules for children of one US citizen and one foreign parent born abroad, in subsection (g):
(g) a person born outside the geographical limits of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is an alien, and the other a citizen of the United States who, prior to the birth of such person, was physically present in the United States or its outlying possessions for a period or periods totaling not less than five years, at least two of which were after attaining the age of fourteen years
But there is no such legal provision made for those of the same circumstance born in the US, except for the child of a US-born aboriginal. Go ahead and read the entire law; I posted a link. It is quite clear. You may think it's flawed, but NO steps have ever been taken to correct it.
Because that sure sounds like a bunch of backyard legalese.
Just the actual law. Read it. It's quite clear. There are no exceptions made for US-born children of foreign nationals, even if one parent is a US citizen, as there is for the US-born child of a US aboriginal. Don't like it? Get it changed. DRob4JC has already posted a bill which would fix that. How? It would make the US-born child of one foreign national and one US citizen, legal immigrant, etc., subject to US jurisdiction, just as what had to be done for a US-born child of a Native American with the Indian Citizenship Act of 1924.
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.
