Are you excited about the proposal in Congress to end birthright citizenship? Do you know what birthright?

Question

citizenship is? It means that if illegals come here and have a kid, that kid is not automatically made a citizen.

Here is the link to this proposal

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20470476/

Answer 1

ROFL... I can't believe how many people are so clueless about our constitution. Congress can and has amended the constitution, that's the definition of amendment. With some clarification of wording we can at last start dealing with one of the many problems with our immigration laws.

Now if congress would adopt some serious fines for employers of these foreign national criminals we can make some real progress.

Answer 2

What a shame. So many people on here that have been deluded by the mainstream media that the 14th amendment actually guarantees birthright citizenship. It does not, never did.
Also discussion on here about what "subject to the jurisdiction" means. Wrong again.
Ever since the subject of Congress taking up Birthright Citizenship have we seen the power of ignorance at work through the MSM. It is difficult to find any editorial or wire story that correctly gives the reader an honest and accurate historical account of the Fourteenth Amendment in regards to children born to foreign parents within the United States. Most often the media presents a fabled and inaccurate account of just what the Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment means.

Recent story lines go something like this: "Currently the Constitution says that a person born in this country is an American citizen. That's it. No caveats." The problem with these sort of statements other than being plainly false is that it reinforces a falsehood that has become viewed as a almost certain fact through such false assertions over time.

Sen. Jacob Howard, who wrote the Fourteenth's Citizenship Clause introduced the clause to the US Senate as follows:

This amendment which I have offered is simply declaratory of what I regard as the law of the land already, that every person born within the limits of the United States, and subject to their jurisdiction, is by virtue of natural law and national law a citizen of the United States. This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the Government of the United States, but will include every other class of persons.

This statement is recorded in the congressional globe. No one made it up. It is a recorded fact.
http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=llcg&fileName=073/llcg073.db&recNum=11
Notice the key words will not include foreigners and aliens.
So than, what exactly did subject to the jurisdiction mean?

Sen. Lyman Trumbull, Chairman of the Judiciary Committee, framer of the Thirteenth Amendment told us in clear language what the phrase means under the Fourteenth:

The provision is, that 'all persons born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens.' That means 'subject to the complete jurisdiction thereof.' What do we mean by 'complete jurisdiction thereof?' Not owing allegiance to anybody else. That is what it means.

If pro immigration groups or individuals want to continue in believing the Fourteenth Amendment grants citizenship to anyone born in the country regardless of their allegiance, fine -- but to continue to insist the Fourteenth Amendment supports their fable is both feeble and a disrespect to American history.

Answer 3

No, actually, that's not what it means.

But the problem with the proposed bill is that it creates a HUGE legal loophole.

As worded, it basically defines that anyone who is born in the US to non-US parents is "not subject to the jurisdiction of the US or any state" -- excluding them from birthright citizenship -- but ALSO meaning that person cannot be punished for violation of any criminal laws by the US or any state.

That's what "subject to the jurisdiction" means -- the person is subject to the laws. By declaring children of illegal immigrants not subject to US laws -- that does deny them citizenship. But it also has huge legal ramifications since they cannot be prosecuted for any other legal violations.

Congress cannot change the plain text of the Constitution by passing laws -- only a Constitutional amendment can do that. And this is a bad law, because the side effects are far worse than the problem it attempts to correct.

Answer 4

Birthright citizenship is when the kid is made a citizen if they are born here, even if there parents are not citizens. I don't think eliminating the birthright should be only directed to illegal immigrants, and not to those who come legally and then have children.

Answer 5

I don't get excited about proposals in congress they rarely come out the same as they come in. It ends up being a huge pork-fest. In order to repeal or rework an amendment to the constitution you need to have votes in every state and the process takes quite a bit of time because you need to use an amendment to change an amendment.

Answer 6

I am sure the military are going to love that for those who are born outside the US!

I guess I need to read the bill as I wonder how they are going to determine who has a birthright and who doesn't? In addition, is the child not going to exist. Other countries are not required to go by our laws or recognize them as a citizen of their country. That kind of puts them between a rock and a hard place.

What is the next bill going to say? That all those that are not 3rd Generation Americans aren't American. Oh and they can do it. They had no problem at all in rounding up AMERICANS who were of Japanese ancestry and put them in concentration camps for the duration of the war!

Germany declares war on us, before we did them. We didn't pick up Germans and take away all their property and throw them in a concentration camp.

I am not sure it would even be constitutional!

How are they going to write this out of the constitution. Not by law I guarantee you!

Clause 5:

No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.

US Constitution!

Dred Scott v. Sanford, 60 U.S. 393 (1857): In regard to the "natural born citizen" clause, the dissent states that it is acquired by place of birth (jus soli), not through blood or lineage (jus sanguinis): "The first section of the second article of the Constitution uses the language, 'a natural-born citizen.' It thus assumes that citizenship may be acquired by birth. Undoubtedly, this language of the Constitution was used in reference to that principle of public law, well understood in this country at the time of the adoption of the Constitution, which referred citizenship to the place of birth." (The majority opinion in this case was mostly overturned by the 14th Amendment.)
United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898): A person born within the jurisdiction of the U.S. to non-citizens who "are not employed in any diplomatic or official capacity" is automatically a citizen.

Answer 7

They can by pass it through other methods.

The US Constitution has already been weakened by CFR(Codes of Federal Regulations), USC(United States Codes), UCC(Uniformed Commercial Codes), and many others. Mainly ignored politicians and business people.

Answer 8

No, I'm not excited. I'm sad that this is the change to the Constitution that might get passed. We couldn't pass the Equal Rights Amendment but we can change the rules for citizenship? Ridiculous.

Answer 9

Never happen, it is part of the 14th amendment to the Consistution , I can be changed by a 3/4 vote of congress that will never happen.

Answer 10

This should have been cleared up years ago when the Myth of it all began. Then there would have been no problem with it as there is these days. Still... it's about damn time.