Are anchor babies allowed to run for president?
Answer:
Of course! Ain't life grand? Only in America!
yes
Of course they are. They're U.S. citizens.
Anchor babies its a new term for racist to hate.
If you are born in US Soil you are and American Citizen. Period!
Yes. They have been born in the US, and are citizens.
if theyre natural born citizens they should
Yes they are an American citizen just like anyone else.
"Anchor babies" are American citizens, indistinguishable from you or me, as set forth by the United States Constitution.
So, that would be a yes.
wait till George p. runs
<>< I would think so, they are legal American citizens. Now, being elected is a whole different matter. I am not so sure that I would vote for someone who's mother and/or father so blatantly broke the law.
Jordan Said:
"Anchor babies its a new term for racist to hate."
No it isn't. It is a term used for the US born children of Illegal aliens of any ethnicity be they white, black, yellow, brown (or what ever ethnicity you want to fill in).
Yes! If they are American citizens...they should be allowed to run for president.
IF THEY ARE AMERICANS BORN IN THE USA !
YES AND LETS HOPE THEY CAN SPEAK FNGLISH !!!
Yes, in Mexico.
Yeah, but with the way our press picks the candidates to death the fact that his parents are criminals would come out. No one would vote for him.
You have to be at least 35 years old to run , I believe. I have never seen a baby in diapers taking the oath of office.
The interesting thing is that "anti-illegals" often cite the need to enforce the laws.. yet, "anchor babies," as you so eloquently put it, are legal U.S. citizens by every definition of American law.
So, which way are we going to have it, are we going to respect the law, or pick and choose? You can't have it both ways.
No because people are still confusing the issue with the 14Th and 15Th amendments. Therefore babies born on the soil of U.S. to illegals are still illegal.
Under current law, born on US soil = US Citizen. That needs to be changed. We need to acknowledge the nationality of both parents. If one is US Citizen and one is from another country, then give the child dual citizenship and have them declare their citizenship and allegiance at their 18th birthday. If both parents are non-citizens, then their child should be a non citizen as well and the birth should be recorded for their country through their nearest Embassy.
Until the anchor baby laws are repealed, yes. Since there is no way repealing the law would be made retroactive, all anchor babies born would be allowed to grow up and run.
The US is one of only a few nations who allow "anchor babies". The 14th Amendment addressed former slaves right to citizenship. The Supreme Court's initial case involved a child born to parents who were LEGALLY in the US and granted the child citizenship. Congress later enacted laws also which established anchor babies. The SC ruling needs challenged. The laws need repealed.
They are as American as any average American in the US.
And yes.
The 14th Amendment was written to legal citizens of the USA and was for establishing citizenship to the slaves - already in the USA by a legal citizen. I'm NOT condoning slavery - just that it was a part of our history and the reason that the 14th Amendment was addressing these issues.
The US Constitution was written to We the People, By the People and For the People of the United States of America. No where does it mention that the illegals would be able to enter our country illegally and have legal citizen babies. That is just a really messed up interpretation of our Constitution.
************
http://idexer.com/2006/05/28/gop-delegat...
GOP delegates declare 14th amendment does not grant automatic citizenship
Republican delegates to the state convention stayed united for the most part Saturday by adopting a platform in support of the war on terrorism, including government monitoring of the "communications of terrorists and their allies." But in one of the few changes to the platform, delegates approved language to deny automatic citizenship to so-called "anchor babies," the children of illegal immigrants born in the United States. "The 14th amendment is not intended for the babies of illegal aliens," said Laura Carter, a delegate from Spokane County. The 14th amendment states that "all persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof are citizens of the United States." Meeting at the Yakima Convention Center, 745 delegates from around the state spent half the day listening to candidates and the other discussing the platform those candidates will take to voters. Attendance totaled more than 1,000 when guests of delegates were counted.
http://www.14thamendment.us/birthright_c...
Anchor babies, ILLEGAL aliens and the 14th amendment
The 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution reads in part:
"All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and the State wherein they reside."
In 1866, Senator Jacob Howard clearly spelled out the intent of the 14th Amendment by writing:
"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. It settles the great question of citizenship and removes all doubt as to what persons are or are not citizens of the United States. This has long been a great desideratum in the jurisprudence and legislation of this country."
Babies born to illegal alien mothers within U.S. borders are called anchor babies because under the 1965 immigration Act, they act as an anchor that pulls the illegal alien mother and eventually a host of other relatives into permanent U.S. residency.
http://uspolitics.tribe.net/thread/78d88...
http://www.archives.gov/national-archive...
The answer is NO because they are not citizens of the United States. Their heritage belongs to that of their mother.
The Immigration information post by website user , MyTend.com not guarantee correctness.
More Immigration Questions and Answers ...