AP, May 25, 2009
U.S. Rep. Nathan Deal, a Republican candidate for governor of Georgia, has proposed changing the long-standing federal policy that automatically grants citizenship to any baby born on U.S. soil, a move opposed by immigrant rights advocates.
Supporters of Deal’s proposal say “birthright citizenship” encourages illegal immigration and makes enforcement of immigration laws more difficult. Opponents say the proposed law wouldn’t solve the illegal immigration problem and goes against this country’s traditions of welcoming immigrants.
Automatic citizenship is enshrined in the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which says: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside.” That provision, ratified in 1868, was drafted with freed slaves in mind.
Deal and his supporters say the 14th Amendment wording was never meant to automatically give citizenship to babies born to illegal immigrants.
{snip}
Under Deal’s proposal, babies born in the U.S. would automatically have citizenship only if at least one of their parents is a U.S. citizen or national, a legal permanent resident of the U.S., or actively serving in the U.S. military.
Azadeh Shahshahani, director of the Immigrants Rights Project of the American Civil Liberties Union of Georgia, said the proposed law “is not cognizant with the American spirit.”
{snip}
Lisa Navarrete, vice president of the National Council of La Raza, a Hispanic advocacy group, said the proposed law wouldn’t stem illegal immigration and would make the problem worse because not only would illegal immigrants be undocumented, their American-born children would be too.
“The worst part of it is you end up with potentially millions of children who are stateless, who were born here and have no ties to any other country, yet they’re not considered citizens or part of the United States,” she said.
{snip}
Deal, who has submitted his bill to the House Judiciary Committee, said he’s not optimistic about it becoming law this year unless it is tacked onto another bill.
{snip}
Original article
(Posted on May 26, 2009)
Comments
This proposal has been voted on once, and it didnt pass.This time around, it wont pass either, but I think that it will get more votes. Hopefully, eventually after so many tries, it will pass.That is being extremely optimistic.Birthright is the most grossly abused law of any nation on this planet.But most of the liberal morons, such as Nancy Pinkolosi will oppose it.
Finally some common sense legislation. Too bad with the libs in control this won’t see the light of day. This should have been done 20 years ago.
Azadeh Shahshahani, director of the Immigrants Rights Project of the American Civil Liberties Union of Georgia, said the proposed law “is not cognizant with the American spirit.”The American spirit has left the room , and only the carcass remains.
Azadeh Shahshahani, director of the Immigrants Rights Project of the American Civil Liberties Union of Georgia, said the proposed law “is not cognizant with the American spirit.”
I thought the ACLU was supposed to be about defending “rights” in America, not trying to interpret what the American “spirit” is supposed to be. Rights are determined by a body of laws.
Not that it matters. This law doesn’t have a snowball’s chance of passing.
The sad thing is that the only law we would really need is one that cracks down on employers for hiring illegals. If employers were hit with stiff fines for hiring illegals the problem could end overnight…that is, if we had the will to solve the problem.
Lisa Navarrete, vice president of the National Council of La Raza, a Hispanic advocacy group, said the proposed law wouldn’t stem illegal immigration and would make the problem worse because not only would illegal immigrants be undocumented, their American-born children would be too.
Crocodile tears. If we enacted effective laws to keep illegals out in the first place (therefore, no orphans of illegals) she would be complaining about that too.
Never heard of a “gentile” with a name like Nathan Deal. But I’ve never heard of a non-“gentile” sponsoring legislation like this. Hmmm, cognitive dissonance…
I love the paragraph from the leftist playbook that says “ending birthright citizenship is an assault against innocent mestizo families.” See, we want to “tear families apart.” Juan isn’t tearing his family apart when he leaves his family and jumps the border into America; WE’RE tearing his family apart when we won’t let them jump the border too!
How about Juan stay with his family in Mexico instead of tearing his family apart?
Azadeh Shahshahani, director of the Immigrants Rights Project of the American Civil Liberties Union of Georgia, said the proposed law “is not cognizant with the American spirit.”
“The worst part of it is you end up with potentially millions of children who are stateless, who were born here and have no ties to any other country, yet they’re not considered citizens or part of the United States,” she said.
********************
Anything that forces these issues into the open is a good thing. Let the Reds be forced to defend their treason again and again. Avoiding this conflict has always been the point of political correctness, campus speech codes and the like. Whenever these issues break through the MSM censorship, more Whites discover that they’re not the only ones who don’t buy the lie.
AND SUBJECT TO THE JURISDICTION THEREOF*********
You don’t have to be a Philadelphia lawyer to understand this straightforward language. Congress should pass this legislation!
Birthright citizenship in the modern age is easily abused.
A pregnant woman can fly in on a visitor visa, with the intention of obtaining birthright citizenship for her child.
The citizenship clause of the 14th amendment has been bastardized from its original, and I might add, noble meaning. The author of the clause, Senator Jacob Howard, stated that “those subject to the jurisdiction of the United States will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners or aliens.” It is unfortunate that this amendment was not worded more specifically, however, coming on the heels of the War for Southern Independence, everyone at the time knew who it was meant to apply to: recently freed blacks.
Why are the traitors of the ACLU still walking around above ground?
Automatic citizenship is not “enshrined” in the 14th amendment.If both parents are outlaws by being in the country illegaly how can that person be born subject to the jurisdiction of the United States.Every person in the United States should do everything possible to end this nation destroying anchor baby nonsense.
Where is the ACLU? Right where they have always been. A C L U = ALL COMMUNISTS LOVE US!
“Azadeh Shahshahani, director of the Immigrants Rights Project of the American Civil Liberties Union of Georgia, said the proposed law “is not cognizant with the American spirit.” “
What would an Iranian woman know about the “American spirit”?
“Automatic citizenship is enshrined in the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which says: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside.”
“the American Civil Liberties Union of Georgia, said the proposed law “is not cognizant with the American spirit.”
***“The worst part of it is you end up with potentially millions of children who are stateless, who were born here and have no ties to any other country, yet they’re not considered citizens or part of the United States,” she said.***
So what! Their ILLEGAL parents should have thought of that. Why would that be our problem?
I had always assumed the intent of the 14th Amendment was to address the status of freed slaves in the former slave territories, though this was not explicitly stated in the language of the amendment.
It’s a grotesque irony that this amendment is now being employed by illegals with the “anchor baby” strategy as a means of gaining entry and citizenship.
The verbiage of the 14th Amendment should be modified to address this perversion of its original intent.
As horrible as it sounds, I would rather see someone starve to death than to have me or my family be forced to feed them. I sincerely hope that right ‘change’ in the country is ignited. If not, as what many posters have written, our country WILL be doomed to a third world status in our lifetimes.
The world is on fire and only the thinkers are afraid.
Lets just let everyone In…. Lets do what the Romans did….Yea Yea……
“All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside.”
One argument is that an illegal alien is not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States. I believe that the “jurisdiction” clause was put in their originally to exempt American Indians who, at the time, were often members of recognized nations, sometimes at war with the United States. One can stretch this a bit and note that illegal aliens are invaders, or perhaps subject to the jurisdiction of their own governments, and therefore this clause still applies.
In any event, the fact that a politician would propose something like this shows that there is some sanity remaining in this country.
