Any child born on US soil is a legal US citizen. Why do so many have trouble understanding that?

Question

It is simple. You may have your opinions as to what the law should state....but this is our current law... why dont they get that?

These are your fellow citizens...and should be respected as such!

I do get that Leogirl, they will either be taken to their parents country or left with the state.

The govt can and does deport both illegal parents of children born in the US.

Lookup, that is right they dont follow dumb laws...which is why the immigration laws need to be changed!

JD must be saying he is not an American citizen.

people seem to be misinterpreting the constitution...saying that "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" Which means they are citizens and must abide by US laws. The children are not breaking the law. They cannot be held responsible for their parents decisions. They are minors (for the most part)

Regardless what anyones opinion is on the subject, if you are born here you get a birth cert. and SS card. You are a Citizen...all assumptions aside.

Real mature Yars baby, Why all the paranoid talk about a war? And I am not Anti-American. I am American. So are those babies...how do they expect to deport babies all the back in time that have lived here all their lives? Not only will it not happen, it is cruel and unusual!

Answer 1

They are labeled as anchor babies, such a horrible term...

I have been called an anchor baby, and both my parents came here legally and my father served in the military to protect there freedoms!

So when you have a closed mind, nothing will ever change and you will never convince them....

Answer 2

Actually, Mendi8a, the Supreme Court specifically reserved judgment on whether a child born of parents ILLEGALLY HERE would be a citizen, and that issue has not been decided. For many years it was assumed that more than just presence even for those legally present was necessary, and the court did overturn that idea. Since then, rather than deny where someone has a right, children born of illegals have been treated as citizens, but the question has not actually been decided.

Answer 3

FYI to the person who thinks that citizenship by birth will change in the next few years. The 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution guarantees citizenship at birth to almost all individuals (except children of foreign heads of state or children of foreign diplomats) born in the United States or in U.S. jurisdictions, according to the principle of jus soli.

So to change the law will require an AMENDMENT to the Constitution (i.e., 2/3rds vote in both House & Senate) and then ratification by the states. There have been 10,000 amendments proposed since 1789 and we only have 27 Amendments to the Constitution, ten of which were part of the original as the Bill of Rights. Making only 17 Amendments in more than 200 years. Is it possible? Of course, anything is possible. Is it probable? Doubtful.

Answer 4

Yes, sadly that is currently true but I hear there is work being done to end that situation.
Virtually all other first world countries, do not allow anchor baby legal immigration.
Also, bear in mind that just cuz a baby is currently born here, if the parent is illegally in the US, the child can stay but the parent when and if found out, must go. Wonder where that baby is going to go if Moma or Papa have to go back to the old country? I doubt the child will stay in the USA.
So, no worries.

Answer 5

"TITLE 8-CHAPTER 12- SUBCHAPTER III- Section 1401a) of the US CODE states: 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;"

I have no trouble understanding it... however, it was written during a different time, and did NOT anticipate "anchor babies".

All it takes is a simple amendment to that law: shall not confer citizenship on, or affect the validity of any denaturalization, deportation, or exclusion action against, any person who is or was in violation of the laws of the United States under The Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1180)

Answer 6

Wow, you have shown your jurisprudence for sure.

Such a complete lack of understanding and knowledge. Astounding.

The law was changed in 1898 for political reasons and the Supreme Court has never stood up to accept it. I support the bill in Congress right now that has 100 supporters that not only want to reverse the incorrect and unjust court decision, but back date it to 1986 where all anchor babies lose their citizenship and subject to deportation.

We get it, you don't get bad law. Why don't you understand that?

Answer 7

no one has worry understanding that in spite of the indisputable fact that it would not advise that the present regulation is "smart". What different us of a did you keep in mind that promises citizenship to all and multiple who takes position to be born in that us of a-inspite of the make sure's legal residency? My interior sight us of a only promises temporary citizenship and easily to toddlers born to legal voters in the experience that they have got been voters for various years (no longer particular if it really is 5 or 8). At age 18, the toddlers would ought to make up their minds which citizenship to shop in the experience that they actually have their mum and dad'. the U. S. needs to replace their guidelines, do not you imagine?! @Michael T: you're incorrect. An acquaintance of mine changed into contained in the U. S. on a vacationer visa and gave beginning (in a charity well being center so the U. S. taxpayers paid for it) and her baby is a US citizen (has a US beginning certificate and a US passport).

Answer 8

OK, this is SIMPLE!

The laws assume consistency; they assume actions are properly addressed in the related legal network before a given clause even BECOMES applicable. In other words, the law assumes that other related laws have been followed for the specific contingency it addresses to hold!

In this case the law assumes that the parents of the child in question have come on US soil LEGALLY. Take the example of people voting. It is common knowledge that every American over 18 has a legal right to vote. But implicitly, it is assumed that the person is not a felon, exempted from this right. If a convicted felon showed up at and tried to cast a vote, if it is found that he is indeed a convicted felon, he is automatically stripped of the right!! It is common sense.

Any child born on US soil is a legal US citizen.-that ASSUMES that the child got in the US through his mother's belly, LEGALLY. It assumed that the mother is a law abiding citizen or legal alien. How common sense is that!!

Look, I am not a US citizen myself, and I know what a great chance it is to have the opportunity to freely work in the US but that does not even slightly inflect my decision-pattern toward an illegal-immigration approach. Trying to find stupid loopholes in the legislation is NOT the solution for illegal immigration.

Immigration laws and procedures can be amended, bettered, and yes, they really can, but the principle of enforcing LEGAL ways of attaining permanent residence or citizenship should invariably be enforced in all cases. It is at the cornerstone of ANY policy.

What CAN be done is minimum wage laws can be abolished: That would fix a lot of unemployment throughout the country, minimum wage laws are UNCONSTITUTIONAL anyway because they infringe on the basic freedoms of employers and potential employees willing to work for a lower wage than the one arbitrarily mandated.

Abolishing minimum wage laws also has the very desirable effect of nullifying any incentive for employers to hire illegal immigrants, because they can hire some snot faced 15 year old kid instead, pay him 5 bucks an hour and not even have to do it under the table. So why resort to illegal labor?

Another thing that can be done is improve the legal channels of immigration. Right now they are very arbitrary, stupid, and fundamentally racist: If you wish to immigrate to the US, your odds are restricted by 'diversity quotas', basically considering you as nothing more but a specimen of your ethnic group, as if the main thing you can offer to America is an incremental contribution to the enrichment of its Etno-cultural fauna. This approach is RACIST and fundamentally ANTI AMERICAN.

The concept of the United States of America is that of a Citizenship Club. It doesn't matter what you country of origin is, as long as you want to and can live a productive life through respecting other people's freedoms. That's what it's all supposed to be about, but the left-wing clowns have ingrained this Kumbaya-all-races-together bullshit in the recruiting policies. Like it should have anything to do with race and ethnicity.

As for those idiots brainwashed into reciting the stupid argument that illegals are "stealing their American jobs", well, THOSE people are the freeloaders in your society. If there are jobs to be had, and if illegals are capable of finding jobs, good for them, if only they had come over legally.

Jobs available for illegals means that the economy is able to absorb more labor, more people, and that minimum wage laws are just freeloaders' legal crutches. The US NEEDS more immigrants, because the economy needs them and Americans are procreating under/borderline replacement level. You NEED immigrants, but you better make sure you recruit the bright, productive, law abiding people among all those who wish to come in the country. Immigration should be merit-based, not geographic-vicinity based (>>Mexico) or ethnic-quota based (the green card lottery).

If all the bright, skilled, civilized people from all over the world were welcomed in the U.S, there would be no economic capacity to host parasitic freeloading illegals at all, and they would know better than to try to illegally break into a country where there's no room for them

Answer 9

Mexico is NOT a third world country by any means....it is a democratic and free country. Does it have poor people...yes, every country does. And yes its those people that come to this country illegally because they dont have the means to support themselves and see the this country for its oppurtunity or to take advantage of it. Please stop referring to Central and South American countries as "third world"....just because it isnt as wealthy as the US doesnt make it as such....it just shows how uneducated and ill-imformed some people on here are. Policies should be enforced and there should be structuring for immgration. Everyone should have a chance to try to live in the United States but only if you are willing to follow the process legally this way the US can protect its own people.

Answer 10

Not so fast. Not just ANY child born is is automatically a citizen. Children born on U.S. to Diplomats of other countries are NOT citizens of the United States. Children born here to parents who are temporary visitors - tourists, folks on business trips - are not citizens. The parents are here on a visa which is covered a treaty between the U.S. and thier country. Most of these treaties have clauses covering the status of children born while the parents are here on that visa.

There hasn't been enough Case Law yet to establish the status of "Anchor Babies", although the trend has been to deny citizenship.

Answer 11

That is NOT constitutionally-correct.

The 14th Amendment has a specific phrase..."and subject to the jurisdiction thereof"...which means foreigners born in the USA are NOT necessarily citizens.

The 14th Amendment was intended for Black people who were regarded as property. Since Blacks were "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" (they had no other citizenship), they were made citizens by virtue of the 14th Amendment.