14 states may try to target birthright citizenship

Hi states, I'd like you to meet the 14th amendment, I don't believe you've met.

GabuEx

[QUOTE="fueled-system"]

Good for them, why should we be held accountable for this loophole that many illegal immigrants use to help stay in this country.

GabuEx

It's in the Constitution, and I don't know about you, but I'd be a little uncomfortable with establishing an exception to the amendment process for the Constitution on the grounds of "it really really needs to change guys, for serious".

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

[QUOTE="fueled-system"]

Good for them, why should we be held accountable for this loophole that many illegal immigrants use to help stay in this country.

ZumaJones07

It's in the Constitution, and I don't know about you, but I'd be a little uncomfortable with establishing an exception to the amendment process for the Constitution on the grounds of "it really really needs to change guys, for serious".

There are laws limiting immigration for a reason. If we didn't have them, we would be overrun and end up just like other countries. Still, I think it good that there are Congressmen putting up a bill to restrict who can and cannot be classified as a citizen. No other country would give us rights if we illegally crossed their borders so why should we give criminals, and yes, that is what people who cross a border are, any rights under our laws or Constitution. No illegal alien should be allowed to have kids who automatically become a US citizen just because they are born north of the Mexican border and south of the Canadian border.

Just last year, a woman attending Kennesaw State University was busted for not having a drivers license, and it was found out she was an illegal immigrant whose parents brought her across the border when she was a kid, attending the school and only paying in-state tuition rules where changed so she had to pay out of state tuition. The Board of Regents even went as far as adopting the rule that no illegal immigrants can attend any state school. With her conviction for not having a license she will be deported, but only after she finishes school. She should be deported immediately upon release from jail if ya ask me.

Illegal immigrants should not be able to access anything paid for by the US taxpayer and should not be able to take advantage of any law designed for someone else.

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

[QUOTE="fueled-system"]

Good for them, why should we be held accountable for this loophole that many illegal immigrants use to help stay in this country.

ZumaJones07

It's in the Constitution, and I don't know about you, but I'd be a little uncomfortable with establishing an exception to the amendment process for the Constitution on the grounds of "it really really needs to change guys, for serious".

I didn't say it shouldn't be changed. The Constitution establishes a very clear procedure through which it can be changed. Which these states seem intent on completely ignoring and just passing state legislation saying "lol, nope".

I didn't say it shouldn't be changed. The Constitution establishes a very clear procedure through which it can be changed. Which these states seem intent on completely ignoring and just passing state legislation saying "lol, nope".

GabuEx

[QUOTE="chessmaster1989"]

[QUOTE="Pirate700"]What are you talking about?

Pirate700

He means most people are (legal) immigrants or descendants of immigrants.

okay, so should grandchildren of illegal immigrants be considered citizens?

where do you draw the line?

I'm indifferent on the matter, on one hand the illegals are just simply overdoing but on the other hand it's not the kid's fault.

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

Hi states, I'd like you to meet the 14th amendment, I don't believe you've met.

LJS9502_basic

Yes but having a Constitution without an amendment process would be horrible. And although amendments are changes to the Constitution, they become a part of the Constitution, so I don't see your point in the first sentence of your post.

[QUOTE="fueled-system"]

Good for them, why should we be held accountable for this loophole that many illegal immigrants use to help stay in this country.

GabuEx

It's in the Constitution, and I don't know about you, but I'd be a little uncomfortable with establishing an exception to the amendment process for the Constitution on the grounds of "it really really needs to change guys, for serious".

And why don't you, your party feels that way all the time...

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

It's in the Constitution, and I don't know about you, but I'd be a little uncomfortable with establishing an exception to the amendment process for the Constitution on the grounds of "it really really needs to change guys, for serious".

fueled-system

Prohabtion that is all I have to say for that comment...

Prohibition was duly amended into the Constitution, and then duly amended out of the Constitution, so I'm not really sure I understand what you mean.

The kids should be with their parents.

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

[QUOTE="fueled-system"]

Good for them, why should we be held accountable for this loophole that many illegal immigrants use to help stay in this country.

fueled-system

It's in the Constitution, and I don't know about you, but I'd be a little uncomfortable with establishing an exception to the amendment process for the Constitution on the grounds of "it really really needs to change guys, for serious".

And why don't you, your party feels that way all the time...

You know what they say about assumptions, right?

Without addressing the rest of the immigration problem, this solves practically nothing.

Without addressing the rest of the immigration problem, this solves practically nothing.

coolbeans90

Agreed. It seems that alot of people just want little so-called solutions for the sake of a solution instead of thinking up smart policy or actually solving the core problem.

So, basically, it's kind oflike saying"well, we gotta do something, so lets try targeting birthright citizenship!"

Isn't that something that needs to be done at the national level?

Why would the individual states be able to control who can or can't be a citizen?

Isn't that something that needs to be done at the national level?

Why would the individual states be able to control who can or can't be a citizen?

BuryMe

It is, and they aren't.

[QUOTE="coolbeans90"]

Without addressing the rest of the immigration problem, this solves practically nothing.

GreySeal9

Agreed. It seems that alot of people just want little so-called solutions for the sake of a solution instead of thinking up smart policy or actually solving the core problem.

So, basically, it's kind oflike saying"well, we gotta do something, so lets try targeting birthright citizenship!"

Well, it could hypothetically make an impact with mass deportation, but considering the facts, this really doesn't do much. (for the record, I don't support mass deportation, I am a fan of immigration and despise that current policies slow American growth this way)

I was under the impression that the United States was a society based on individuality and merit, not on privilege given by birthrights. That sounds something a lot more aristocratic, you know, the kind of thing Americans opposed during the Revolutionary War.

I was under the impression that the United States was a society based on individuality and merit, not on privilege given by birthrights. That sounds something a lot more aristocratic, you know, the kind of thing Americans opposed during the Revolutionary War.

_BlueDuck_

It's kind of hard to award a baby citizenship based on merit.

Isn't that something that needs to be done at the national level?

Why would the individual states be able to control who can or can't be a citizen?

BuryMe

The story isn't saying they're trying to prevent birthright citizenship in their individual states, they're trying to introduce legislation in Congress to get the Constitution amended so illegal immigrants couldn't have a child here who would automatically be a citizen anymore. If the individual state tried to do that alone the Federal Government would strike it down as unconstitutional. In a way it really doesn't matter that much since if the parent's goal is to get legal through their child their child can't even apply for a visa for their parents until they turn 21. In that amount of time the parent could have found a legal way to get a visa already.

[QUOTE="_BlueDuck_"]

I was under the impression that the United States was a society based on individuality and merit, not on privilege given by birthrights. That sounds something a lot more aristocratic, you know, the kind of thing Americans opposed during the Revolutionary War.

GabuEx

It's kind of hard to award a baby citizenship based on merit.

It's hard to award any baby with merit. So there's no difference between a baby of an illegal or that of an already-citizen. They are both born here and that's really all you can base citizenship off of.

I agree with this in a way, I dont think that a child should be able to be used as a tether to allow people to become citizens of a country free. However kicking babies out of the USA is a terrible idea.

dragonfly110

So much for being the country of freedom :)

brendanhunt1

freedom went out the door 50 years ago or so

The evil FED GOV will strike this down as "unconstitutional," yet the FED GOV doesn't give a rats poop about the Constitution. I mean, the fact they have allowed 30-50 million illegal immigrants in the first place shows they only pick and choose what they want out of the Constitution.

The states need to give D.C. a middle finger and if D.C. gives one back, time to secede.

I wish Civil War II would start already!

The evil FED GOV will strike this down as "unconstitutional," yet the FED GOV doesn't give a rats poop about the Constitution. I mean, the fact they have allowed 30-50 million illegal immigrants in the first place shows they only pick and choose what they want out of the Constitution.

The states need to give D.C. a middle finger and if D.C. gives one back, time to secede.

I wish Civil War II would start already!

AHUGECAT

On a related note, what's going to happen first... Civil War II or Mexican American War II?

This is great news. At least the states are making an effort to do SOMETHING about the immigration issue. Something Bush/Obama haven't. I don't see how this could be anything but positive, I'm not anti immigration I'm anti ILLEGAL immigration. If you illegally enter the country, mooch off of the system in place by having a kid, then you don't deserve to be a US citizen. That isnt fair to the legal immigrants who followed the rules.

It just blows my mind people who think we should just let anyone who feels like coming in to just come in, yea, that would work well....:roll:

This is great news. At least the states are making an effort to do SOMETHING about the immigration issue. Something Bush/Obama haven't. I don't see how this could be anything but positive, I'm not anti immigration I'm anti ILLEGAL immigration. If you illegally enter the country, mooch off of the system in place by having a kid, then you don't deserve to be a US citizen. That isnt fair to the legal immigrants who followed the rules.

It just blows my mind people who think we should just let anyone who feels like coming in to just come in, yea, that would work well....:roll:

xXCombatWombat

But this is targetting legal citizens.

The evil FED GOV will strike this down as "unconstitutional," yet the FED GOV doesn't give a rats poop about the Constitution. I mean, the fact they have allowed 30-50 million illegal immigrants in the first place shows they only pick and choose what they want out of the Constitution.

The states need to give D.C. a middle finger and if D.C. gives one back, time to secede.

I wish Civil War II would start already!

AHUGECAT

Yes because that worked out so well for those who seceded the first time.

[QUOTE="xXCombatWombat"]

This is great news. At least the states are making an effort to do SOMETHING about the immigration issue. Something Bush/Obama haven't. I don't see how this could be anything but positive, I'm not anti immigration I'm anti ILLEGAL immigration. If you illegally enter the country, mooch off of the system in place by having a kid, then you don't deserve to be a US citizen. That isnt fair to the legal immigrants who followed the rules.

It just blows my mind people who think we should just let anyone who feels like coming in to just come in, yea, that would work well....:roll:

_BlueDuck_

But this is targetting legal citizens.

Anchor Babies =/= Legal Citizens

This is great news. At least the states are making an effort to do SOMETHING about the immigration issue. Something Bush/Obama haven't. I don't see how this could be anything but positive, I'm not anti immigration I'm anti ILLEGAL immigration. If you illegally enter the country, mooch off of the system in place by having a kid, then you don't deserve to be a US citizen. That isnt fair to the legal immigrants who followed the rules.

It just blows my mind people who think we should just let anyone who feels like coming in to just come in, yea, that would work well....:roll:

xXCombatWombat

You don't see how states attempting to overrule the Constitution could be anything but positive?

[QUOTE="xXCombatWombat"]

This is great news. At least the states are making an effort to do SOMETHING about the immigration issue. Something Bush/Obama haven't. I don't see how this could be anything but positive, I'm not anti immigration I'm anti ILLEGAL immigration. If you illegally enter the country, mooch off of the system in place by having a kid, then you don't deserve to be a US citizen. That isnt fair to the legal immigrants who followed the rules.

It just blows my mind people who think we should just let anyone who feels like coming in to just come in, yea, that would work well....:roll:

GabuEx

You don't see how states attempting to overrule the Constitution could be anything but positive?

I think it should be amended! This rule wasn't put in place for sleazy illegals to break in and pop babies out in american hospitals to reap the benefits. It was for african americans who had recently been freed from slavery.

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

[QUOTE="xXCombatWombat"]

This is great news. At least the states are making an effort to do SOMETHING about the immigration issue. Something Bush/Obama haven't. I don't see how this could be anything but positive, I'm not anti immigration I'm anti ILLEGAL immigration. If you illegally enter the country, mooch off of the system in place by having a kid, then you don't deserve to be a US citizen. That isnt fair to the legal immigrants who followed the rules.

It just blows my mind people who think we should just let anyone who feels like coming in to just come in, yea, that would work well....:roll:

xXCombatWombat

You don't see how states attempting to overrule the Constitution could be anything but positive?

I think it should be amended! This rule wasn't put in place for sleazy illegals to break in and pop babies out in american hospitals to reap the benefits. It was for african americans who had recently been freed from slavery.

If you think it should be amended, then why are you not saying, "This isn't good; we should amend the Constitution instead of having states unilaterally attempt to overrule it"?

[QUOTE="_BlueDuck_"]

[QUOTE="xXCombatWombat"]

This is great news. At least the states are making an effort to do SOMETHING about the immigration issue. Something Bush/Obama haven't. I don't see how this could be anything but positive, I'm not anti immigration I'm anti ILLEGAL immigration. If you illegally enter the country, mooch off of the system in place by having a kid, then you don't deserve to be a US citizen. That isnt fair to the legal immigrants who followed the rules.

It just blows my mind people who think we should just let anyone who feels like coming in to just come in, yea, that would work well....:roll:

xXCombatWombat

But this is targetting legal citizens.

Anchor Babies =/= Legal Citizens

Everyone born in the United States = citizen.

Says it right there in the Constitution.

[QUOTE="xXCombatWombat"]

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

You don't see how states attempting to overrule the Constitution could be anything but positive?

GabuEx

I think it should be amended! This rule wasn't put in place for sleazy illegals to break in and pop babies out in american hospitals to reap the benefits. It was for african americans who had recently been freed from slavery.

If you think it should be amended, then why are you not saying, "This isn't good; we should amend the Constitution instead of having states unilaterally attempt to overrule it"?

Well ideally I would like it to be, but seeing as our federal government turns a blind eye to federal laws, I've lost all hope in that. If they enforced illegal immigration laws in the first place we wouldn't have this problem, eh?

[QUOTE="xXCombatWombat"]

[QUOTE="_BlueDuck_"]

But this is targetting legal citizens.

_BlueDuck_

Anchor Babies =/= Legal Citizens

Everyone born in the United States = citizen.

Says it right there in the Constitution.

Just because it says it in the constitution doesn't make it right, the context it is used in today is completely different than the one the writers intended. it should be changed because it is being abused to give illegals free citizenship.

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

[QUOTE="xXCombatWombat"]

I think it should be amended! This rule wasn't put in place for sleazy illegals to break in and pop babies out in american hospitals to reap the benefits. It was for african americans who had recently been freed from slavery.

xXCombatWombat

If you think it should be amended, then why are you not saying, "This isn't good; we should amend the Constitution instead of having states unilaterally attempt to overrule it"?

Well ideally I would like it to be, but seeing as our federal government turns a blind eye to federal laws, I've lost all hope in that. If they enforced illegal immigration laws in the first place we wouldn't have this problem, eh?

So... basically, your position is that states should be allowed to ignore the Constitution as long as they're pretty sure what they're doing is a good idea?

[QUOTE="xXCombatWombat"]

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

If you think it should be amended, then why are you not saying, "This isn't good; we should amend the Constitution instead of having states unilaterally attempt to overrule it"?

GabuEx

Well ideally I would like it to be, but seeing as our federal government turns a blind eye to federal laws, I've lost all hope in that. If they enforced illegal immigration laws in the first place we wouldn't have this problem, eh?

So... basically, your position is that states should be allowed to ignore the Constitution as long as they're pretty sure what they're doing is a good idea?

Considering the fact that the president (Bush and Obama) should have been impeached for failure to protect the citizens of the United States, yes I think it's getting to the point where the government just doesn't care, and something drastic needs to be done.

[QUOTE="PannicAtack"]We need to follow the constitution! Aside from those parts we don't like...surrealnumber5

Haha so true :P

[QUOTE="_BlueDuck_"]

[QUOTE="xXCombatWombat"]

Anchor Babies =/= Legal Citizens

xXCombatWombat

Everyone born in the United States = citizen.

Says it right there in the Constitution.

Just because it says it in the constitution doesn't make it right, the context it is used in today is completely different than the one the writers intended. it should be changed because it is being abused to give illegals free citizenship.

You said anchor babies are not legal citizens. Whether or not you think it's right or not, that is incorrect; they are legal citizens.

The point I like to make again, is that why do children born of a legal citizen deserve citizenship any more than that of an illegal immigrant? The only difference is what their parents have done, and that is no fault of the child. If your father or mother break the law and are charged, you have no obligation to take on their criminal charge, nor can that charge be transfered to you, so I don't see how this case is any different.

I'm not going to say that immigration isn't a problem, and the system isn't abused. But that doesn't mean that we can start denying citizenship to people who have done no wrong themselves.

[QUOTE="xXCombatWombat"]

[QUOTE="_BlueDuck_"]

Everyone born in the United States = citizen.

Says it right there in the Constitution.

_BlueDuck_

Just because it says it in the constitution doesn't make it right, the context it is used in today is completely different than the one the writers intended. it should be changed because it is being abused to give illegals free citizenship.

You said anchor babies are not legal citizens. Whether or not you think it's right or not, that is incorrect; they are legal citizens.

The point I like to make again, is that why do children born of a legal citizen deserve citizenship any more than that of an illegal immigrant? The only difference is what their parents have done, and that is no fault of the child. If your father or mother break the law and are charged, you have no obligation to take on their criminal charge, nor can that charge be transfered to you, so I don't see how this case is any different.

I'm not going to say that immigration isn't a problem, and the system isn't abused. But that doesn't mean that we can start denying citizenship to people who have done no wrong themselves.

Why can't we? Send them back to their home country, its not like were going to abort the baby or something. If the Mexican government helped the US with the immigration problem instead of pushing the poor on American and burdening us, that would help solve the problem.

If you really can't see the difference between LEGAL American citizens, who followed the rules, didn't break any laws, and have a baby who is a citizen; and Illegal Immigrants, who break in, have a baby and then get citizenship then I don't know what to say....

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

[QUOTE="xXCombatWombat"]

Well ideally I would like it to be, but seeing as our federal government turns a blind eye to federal laws, I've lost all hope in that. If they enforced illegal immigration laws in the first place we wouldn't have this problem, eh?

xXCombatWombat

So... basically, your position is that states should be allowed to ignore the Constitution as long as they're pretty sure what they're doing is a good idea?

Considering the fact that the president (Bush and Obama) should have been impeached for failure to protect the citizens of the United States, yes I think it's getting to the point where the government just doesn't care, and something drastic needs to be done.

Incidentally, there is more border patrol now than at any time in recent history, and crime along the southern border is down.

[QUOTE="xXCombatWombat"]

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

So... basically, your position is that states should be allowed to ignore the Constitution as long as they're pretty sure what they're doing is a good idea?

GabuEx

Considering the fact that the president (Bush and Obama) should have been impeached for failure to protect the citizens of the United States, yes I think it's getting to the point where the government just doesn't care, and something drastic needs to be done.

Incidentally, there is more border patrol now than at any time in recent history, and crime across the southern border is down.

Yea, and Obama reluctantly sent National Guard troops to the border after public outcry for it. Bush at least sent a decent amount (around 4,000 i think) Obama sent 1,200, shows how interested the federal government is in following the laws.