You and I probably disagree on “Anchor” babies.
Under the constituion they are US citizens. However, I don’t think that means the parents get to stay. Give the parents a choice. Leave the country WITH your child, they should also be a citizen of your home country. Or you can leave and the US citizen will stay and be put into the foster system UNLESS you have a relative here that is a US Citizen, then they will need to adopt the child and take full responsibility for the child.
I don’t get the question, I was not commenting on how chain migration was good or bad for the economy, or how immigration impacts the economy at all.
He had no legal authority to release it and to take copies home was a crime.
My bad . . . you said good for the country.
My stance still stands. They are not ancors. Their parents have made certain choices. When they get deported they should have to make another choice.
Chain migration: Just because your here and a citizen, should give your relatives any more rights.
I disagree. Giving the power to any pregnant woman on the planet to decide if she wants to make her baby a US citizen, takes the power of citizenship out of the control of the nation and the people.
The Constitution never granted the right of illegal entrants into the US the power to create US citizens, uninvited, and athwart our laws.
Under the constition, if they are born here, then they are citizens.
14th amendment and the debate on it makes it clear that if an imigrant has a child here, then they are a citizen.
Combine anchor babies with chain migration, and you have an unwelcomed, uninvited, unlawful entrant into the US, creating a baby, granting it instant US citizenship.
Then 18 or so years later the fruit of their unlawful act brings in the entire family? They thumb their nose at our laws, and we reward them for it, it’s crazy, and we the people have no say in the matter? In fact we are bigots is we object to this?
There is the small matter of an illegal immigrant not falling under US jurisdiction. They are citizens of a foreign power, and not subject to US jurisdiction.
You cannot trespass into the USA, thumbing your nose at, and disobeying US laws, then claim you should be rewarded.
Just as a thief cannot steal a TV from Best Buy, then claim they have the right to have warranty work performed on it.
Says who? You?
I voted straight ticket once, no more. I also used to skip the off year elections and the primaries, those days are gone too.
The IG and Rosenstein among others.
I disagree. If the illegal immigrant commits a crime, they can and are arrested, charged, tried and if found guilty jailed. They ARE under our juristiction while here. Diplomates are NOT under our juristiction because if they committe a crime – even murder – they can not be arrested by our law enforcement, they can not be jailed in our jails.
unfortunatly that’s now the way the 14th amendment. Had they left the original language of the civil rights act it would be correct. They changed it just enough to allow children born here of anyone to be citizens.
apples to oranges.
He was lying.
I 100% agree with you and Congress should clarify this.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m a database guy, but you are trying to apply binary principles ( 1 or 0, TRUE or FALSE, Yes or No) to human beings. I make a living tracking “Data” and converting it into useful “Information”. But when talking about human beings rarely do they exist in the binary world as TRUE or FALSE.
When talking about human you will frequently have to dissect data from TRUE or FALSE into defined ranges. For example take age. In a binary world you would have age either TRUE or FALSE, either you are alive or not. To make that data meaningful for analysis we will commonly break age into components or levels for examination where each level can be individually evaluated as TRUE or FALSE.
Same goes to political affiliation, You can say “all republican’s” believe the same, all Dennison voters believe the same, etc… It wouldn’t be true but you can say it.
.>>>>
I was a Registered Republican from 1975 until 2016.
A happy registered Republican for most of those years.
I truly felt the party had a place for anyone, for everyone.
Then the party changed.
I was a NTR during the primaries because I wanted Cruz but now I’m a staunch TR.
We only have limited jurisdiction, such as over their civil conduct, when they are in our country, not over their person. We cannot tax their income, cannot draft them into our military, or confiscate their passport and refuse to recognize that they are foreign citizen of another nation. Because, we do not have jurisdiction over them.
Just as the state of Illinois has jurisdiction over their speed limit laws, they cannot cite us with a ticket for not registering our car in their state, or tax out income, because we are citizens of another state.
The 14th amendment specifically addressed the injustices being done to blacks. We did not suddenly decide to empower every pregnant woman on earth, to break our laws, sneak into the USA, and pop out an instant US citizen.
If any woman crossing into the USA, by hook or by crook, had the power to create a US citizen, we would not have bothered to add that they must fall under US jurisdiction.
Either way, because you already know all of this and still maintain your opinion, we need to change our citizenship laws. We need to make it clear who is, and who is not a US citizen at birth.
Yes and the original language was COMPLETE juristiction. When they removed the complete, it changed the meaning. Along with the discussion in the record, it was to apply to immigrants children (one asked if the amendment would apply to the children of the Chinese, and there was no objection. One asked if the amendment would apply to the children of the Gypse and there was no objection.)
Where in the world did you get this information?
