instead of the talk on gays and flag burning for changing the constitution?
2006-08-28 08:41:33 · 11 answers · asked by intheskeye 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Immigration
It can. It just hasn't yet.
And that might be a workable proposal. Think it through....
Does it protect children born of people who followed the rules and immigrated legally ("legal resident")? Does it make the right kind of distinctions, or does it discriminate unfair? Does it punish anyone who shouldn't be punished?
At a casual glance, to me, that proposal seems to draw the proper lines, respecting the law and the intent of the citizenship provision, and not being too over-inclusive or under-inclusive.
2006-08-28 08:44:14 · answer #1 · answered by coragryph 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well, because you got your progress, and you got your Congress...and Congress these days is just one big writhing ball of conflicts of interest. The 'anchor baby' thing is just one part of it, but the whole thing really does come down to enforcement.
If the border's not going to be effectively enforced, then people will cross illegally, plain and simple. This really is a no-brainer, but it's doubtful in my view that Bush and company will REALLY push for 100% enforcement, that crowd has a financial stake in all of this, mexicans are good money, there, they work cheap and if they don't you can threaten to throw em out etc. Sweet deal for unscrupulous employers...pay em 1/4 of what you'd pay american workers, treat em like dirt, and chase em out when the season's over. But, the fun part is, this particular joke's now gone on for decades, and Mexico's making mad money off us these days. On one hand, you gotta respect the drive, on the other, you have to question where the country's headed in about, say, 20 years...
2006-08-28 15:51:22 · answer #2 · answered by gokart121 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
That really wouldn't bother me so much if Mexicans weren't completely taking advantage of the fact that they get it like that now. Accidently being in another country when giving birth is one thing, but deliberately coming here to give birth to a citizen for the parent's gain makes me sick. I think at least one parent should be legal in order to get citizenship. Where are their family values? Children should not be tools.
2006-08-28 16:03:13 · answer #3 · answered by DJ 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
All births regarless of legal or illegal citizens,are born americans!!
The changing of the Constitution for gays, lesbians and Bisexuals is a different case.
2006-08-28 15:55:02 · answer #4 · answered by alfonso 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I don't know why the 14th isn't interpreted as it was intended anyway ... they keywords are "and under the jurisdiction" of the U.S. ... I have never understood how an illegal can be deemed to be under the jurisdiction of anything other than his/her country of origin .... I believe several lawyers are looking into it as we speak .... not a day too soon ....
2006-08-28 16:00:01 · answer #5 · answered by Sashie 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It already has. The 14th Amendment (passed in the 1870s, I believe) states that anybody born within US borders is an American citizen.
'Course, the 14th Amendment was passed illegally...
2006-08-28 15:55:37 · answer #6 · answered by usarocketman 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Not exactly sure what your asking... Anyone born in the US is an instant citizen.
That wont change until politicians risk losing more votes by not changing it than they would by changing it.
2006-08-28 15:53:24 · answer #7 · answered by TLJaguar 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Oh that would be just grand. We already have nearly 300 million people here we can take another 100 million. Dumb idea.
2006-08-28 15:46:59 · answer #8 · answered by shirley e 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
interesting idea
we wouldn't need to change the constitution, though, just a law
2006-08-28 15:45:18 · answer #9 · answered by Dwight D J 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
would not be right.
2006-08-28 16:45:34 · answer #10 · answered by ssgtusmc3013 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋