!4th Amendment and anchor babies

[Bubblehead1980]

Originally Posted by SteamWake

Wait what does the 4th amendment have to do with 'anchor babies'?

I fat fingered the title and cant change it apparently, ooops.Meant 14th.

to other, I will respond soon, took up my forum time in another thread.good thread going though guys.

I will say I have decided I would like to see birthright citizenship changed so that anchor babies are a thing of the past.So amend the constitution I say

[razark]

Originally Posted by Ducimus

As much as i dislike to change the constitution, this needs to be changed, and a simple change is all that is needed.

If one or both of your parent's is an American citizen, your citizenship is your birthright.

If neither of your parents is an American citizen, then you will not be granted citizenship.

What about foreign nationals legally in the country? Where I work, we have a decently large number of foreign nationals that come here for business purposes, some of them for years. They are still foreign citizens, but they have been in the US for a long time, contributing to the goals of the US government, and raising their families within the society. How would your proposed rules account for a child born into such a family?

[Ducimus]

What about foreign nationals legally in the country?

There's already something for that. It's called a work visa. When it expires, they go home. If you want to stay longer, then apply for citizenship.

[mookiemookie]

Originally Posted by Bubblehead1980

I will say I have decided I would like to see birthright citizenship changed so that anchor babies are a thing of the past.So amend the constitution I say

A cursory internet search will cut through the hype and hysteria about so-called "anchor babies." Having a child in the U.S. is no guarantee of illegal immigrant parents not being deported. A baby born in such circumstances can't sponsor a parent for a U.S. visa until age 21.

If you have an interest in such things, you'll see that even the Supreme Court has ruled that having a child born in the U.S. doesn't preclude you from being deported (see Immigration and Naturalization Service v. Jong Ha Wang 1981).

Like most political garbage in the U.S., the debate is long on fiery rhetoric appealing to base nationalistic emotion, but short on actual facts.

[Ducimus]

60,000 babies born to non-citizens in Texas every year

As the debate over illegal immigration – and now over the 14th amendment – heats up, consider this:

In Texas alone, there are more than 60,000 babies born to non-citizens every year. These babies automatically become U.S. citizens.

The Dallas Morning News reports that last year these births represented almost 16% of the total births statewide. And, that from 2001 to 2009, there were more than 542,000 births to illegal immigrant women.

Let me repeat, all these babies automatically become U.S. citizens... and we're just talking about Texas here.

http://caffertyfile.blogs.cnn.com/20...y-year/?hpt=T2

Like I said. You folks are debating that which is not in play. The Constitutionof the US.


At this point it is irrevelant. The courts know it, the congress knows it, all branches of government know it.

More importantly our enemies know it.

[mookiemookie]

Originally Posted by Ducimus

http://caffertyfile.blogs.cnn.com/20...y-year/?hpt=T2

And how many immigrants who would otherwise be deported remain in the U.S. because of their "anchor baby?" My guess is somewhere close to zero.

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by The Third Man

IAs soon as abortion was made legal as an interpretation of the 4th amendment all holds were off. After that any interpretation of social , economic, or political reason is up for grabs.

Where in the Constution was abortion illegal in the first place? The law was changed, and a guaranteed right was used to change it. The Constitution was not changed at all.

I'm pretty sure that if a foreign national marries an American citizen then there is no argument or question. It's a time-honored practice to gain entrance into a country by that very means.

But there is an arguement and question as it can also be a very serious crime, more serious than just plain illegal entry.
Have a look at that recent episode in Norfolk Virginia with what was in effect human trafficing plus defrauding government.
I will see if I can find a link but in essence it was a scam where sailors were being paid for importing fake "brides" from eastern europe so the women got into the States andthe servicemen could claim pay benefits on their fake marriages.

[Sailor Steve]

Of course it can be used to commit a crime, as can just about any other legitimate law or practice. I was answering a specific question.