Having a baby in the U.S. makes the baby a citizen, according to the Constitution, and to change this rule, you have to amend the Constitution.
Also, current immigration law does not allow anyone under the age of 18 to sponsor their parent for an immigrant visa. These parents do not receive citizenship because their children are citizens, and they do not receive any kind of pass to stay in the country. It actually just causes a lot of problems for themselves and the baby.
2006-08-19
10:02:16
·
12 answers
·
asked by
Aleksandr
4
in
Politics & Government
➔ Immigration
About me doing research: I didn't do any research for this, I had to do the research because I married an Argentine woman, and we're going through the immigration process now... so when people don't know the rules, I guess I can't blame them, I've spent months studying this stuff out of necessity
2006-08-19
10:26:06 ·
update #1
The problem is that this (Fourteenth Amendment)
has been misinterpreted in recent years
to mean simply that anyone born in the U.S,
under any circumstances,
is an American citizen.
This is neither the original intent of the law
nor the way it was interpreted by the courts
in subsequent decades.
Some Americans speak of birthright citizenship
as if it were an immutable law of nature.
It is not,
and most other nations do not, in fact, recognize it.
It is only a bad habit
that could be broken with a simple Executive Order.
The key to undoing the current misinterpretation
of the Fourteenth Amendment is this odd phrase
"AND SUBJECT TO THE JURISDICTION THEREOF."
The whole problem is caused by the fact
that the meaning of this phrase,
which was clear to anyone versed in legal language
in 1868, has slipped with changes in usage.
Fortunately, there is a large group of court precedents
that make clear what the phrase actually means:
The Fourteenth Amendment EXCLUDES
the children of aliens.
(The Slaughterhouse Cases (83 U.S. 36 (1873))
The Fourteenth Amendment draws a distinction
between the children of aliens and children of citizens.
(Minor v. Happersett (88 U.S. 162 (1874))
The phrase "subject to the jurisdiction" REQUIRES
"direct and immediate allegiance" to the United States,
not just physical presence.
(Elk v. Wilkins 112 U.S. 94 (1884))
There is no automatic birthright citizenship
in a particular case.
(Wong Kim Ark Case, 169 U.S. 649 (1898))
The Supreme Court has never confirmed
birthright citizenship for the children of illegal aliens,
temporary workers, and tourists.
(Plyler v. Doe, 457 U.S. 202, 211 n.10 (1982))
There are other cases referring to minor details of the question.
"The situation we have today is absurd,"
alleges Craig Nelsen,
director of Friends of Immigration Law Enforcement,
a group of attorneys and immigration experts
that is trying to do something about the problem.
"There is a huge and growing industry in Asia
that arranges tourist visas for pregnant women
so they can fly to the United States
and give birth to an American.
This was not the intent of the Fourteenth Amendment;
it makes a mockery of citizenship."
(Sound FAMILIAR??)
Lets Get Real And Stop Lying To Ourselves
We Should STOP Being Politically Correct
About ALL Conditions
This One Is No Different
These Are NOT Babies
Not Even ANCHOR BABIES
Or CHILDREN Either
Lets Call Them What They Are
TOOLS
Tools USED To MANIPULATE The System Of Laws
Its Disgusting But Its The Truth
No PC About It
2006-08-19 10:13:13
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
1⤋
That's not a question. It is a personal opinion, which you are entitled to.
The worse excuse is, 'this country was built by immigrants'. This country was built on instilled fear, via torture, brutality, mass genocide (far beyond the Jewish mini holocaust) and stolen land.
To keep the recent free people from obtaining employment, the government condoned corporations hiring illegal immigrants. These immigrants did not come into the U.S. for massive handouts and they had to learn the American English. No accommodations were made at the taxpayers expense. etc....
2006-08-19 10:48:26
·
answer #2
·
answered by SLOWTHINKER 3
·
0⤊
2⤋
Pro-Criminals are not aware of how any law works since they just want to be here no matter what. Babies is just another excuse to stay after breaking the law.
2006-08-19 10:16:28
·
answer #3
·
answered by remmo16 4
·
3⤊
0⤋
did you know that this particular part of the constitution was written specifically for black slaves? it is now being abused by illegals and they are already discussion an amendment
2006-08-21 05:19:13
·
answer #4
·
answered by thelogicalferret 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Thank you for intelligently stating the rules.
2006-08-19 10:19:34
·
answer #5
·
answered by coragryph 7
·
2⤊
0⤋
I agree, with you to an extent, except, I am totaly, against letting a child not know his parents, and be raised, by them.
Which is why I say, IF THERE NOT LEAGAL THEIR CHILDREN SHOULDNT BE EITHER.
2006-08-19 10:10:01
·
answer #6
·
answered by irishviper1 2
·
3⤊
0⤋
Here's hoping your wife gets here soon. Good Luck!!!
2006-08-19 10:42:53
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Sounds about right.
2006-08-19 10:08:14
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
Thank you for saying that, when I say it, they dont listen to me. They think I am in love with everything Mexican and am delusional because my husband is from Mexico.
2006-08-19 10:26:10
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
2⤋
they believe anything they hear
2006-08-19 10:06:59
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
2⤋