Why should the US give citizenship to newborns born of foreign parents?
Answer:
We don't hold the baby hostage. The mother is free to take her child with her. This law was intended to give legal citizenship to the children of slaves, not illegal immigrants. It is no longer needed, and being seriously abused.
"...and subject to the jurisdiction thereof..." Does that apply to illegal immigrants?
That pesky Constitution.
dude, nobody really cares
If the child is a citizen he or she needs the mother to be a permanent resident of course so they can be taken care of.
It's a perverted interpretation of the Constitution, and against the intent of the founders, in my opinion.
I'm not 100 per cent certain about this, but I'm about 90 per cent sure.
They are given it because they are minors and they are born on American soil. But the parents can still get deported no matter what. Illegals think that if their kids are born on American soil they get a free way into America, which is not true because they cant get a citizenship with being born illegal
They should not from here on out and say ye all! This is an outdated and obviously never saw it coming law that needs to be put to rest ! See yall muchachos Adios!
It's part of the great American system. If your born in America, then your an American. If it wasn't this way, then someone could come along and say that any of us aren't legal citizens. Should everyone first pass a test when they're 18 to determine citizenship? If a child wasn't a citizen, and couldn't apply to become one until they were 18, then how would a low income family be able to receive benefits for said child when you have to be a citizen? If what your saying is a problem, then what kind of problem would we have if we didn't have the born in America laws?
yeah it sucks, and this happens frequently.
That is a misnomer fable started by the media. Why the country does this against the U.S. Constitution is beyond me. Americas forefathers did not accept the English Common Law Jui Solis - as others will tell you. It's not true, and they specifically made mention that Americans and Naturalized citizens babies are of legal American citizenship based on Natural Law, and National Law, and not England's Common Law practice. England's Common Law was that "Any child born in any country was of English citizenship." That did not bowed well with America forefathers. So they put together the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and Civil Rights to change the despised English Common Law forever.
The 14th Amendment was to include only the American Africans, and their children during that time, and when they were no longer in slavery. The 15th Amendment backs up the 14th Amendment. Later they also the added the Native Americans to the list of their status and babies as American citizens too.
Follow the links to the left for more info.
http://idexer.com/
Why U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark Can Never Be Considered Settled Birthright Law
http://federalistblog.us/2006/12/us_v_wo...
We shouldn't, but we do. you can't fault the baby, i know. but the parents should be legal and that legality should be passed to the child (family) if they are not legal, then neither are the children.
The 14th amendment to the constitution.
Why do we do this? The Constitution demands it. Amendment XIV, Section 1, first sentence: "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the juridiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State in which they reside."
That's fairly unambiguous, and the proviso "subject to the juridiction thereof" has not been taken to mean an exclusion for US-born children of illegal aliens -- it does exclude, by Congressional order, children of foreign diplomats, though (because they cannot be held subject to US law, whereas children of illegal aliens are still subject to US law on US soil).
Partially, this would be a response to slavery; a child born to a slave in the United States would automatically become a citizen on this basis, regardless of the citizenship of their parents.
Today, this is a wonderful aspect of our country, which says that being American is not about being of a certain race or family bloodline, but rather is a blessing given to all those who arrive in the world here.
The situation is indeed awkward, but modifying the Constitution to strip the citizenship of people born here is probably not a good answer, even though some European countries (like the UK) are moving in that direction. It's a big country, and there's space enough for everyone.
Best answer supplied by Fred.
But if you want to toss out the constitution then the truth is none of us are citizens. Ironically, If all descendents of all immigrants should have to forfeit citizenship and return to their country of ancestry based on your invalidating the 14th amendment, then all whites, blacks, and Asians, would have to leave and Mexicans, based on their previous occupation of Texas, Arizona, New Mexico, Colorado, Utah, Nevada, and California, would get to stay along with the native American Indians. Is that the result you were looking for genius?
Birth right citizenship derives from the pre-New Deal court - U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898) - in a judgment of the court delivered by Mr. Justice Gray - one of the most distinguished justices ever to serve on the court. It is therefore well reasoned and is not made of whole cloth.
The importance of birth right citizenship is that it stops officials from defining citizenship requirements in such a way, that they control public opinion. This is a fundamental constitutional principle.
As Jackson J. (the most conservative New Dealer - Rehnquist CJ clerked for him) said for the US Supreme Court in West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette 319 US 624 (1943):-
It seems trite but necessary to say that the First Amendment to our Constitution was designed to avoid these ends by avoiding these beginnings. There is no mysticism in the American concept of the State or of the nature or origin of its authority. We set up government by consent of the governed, and the Bill of Rights denies those in power any legal opportunity to coerce that consent. Authority here is to be controlled by public opinion, not public opinion by authority.
* * *
If there is any fixed star in our constitutional constellation, it is that no official, high or petty, can prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics, nationalism, religion, or other matters of opinion or force citizens to confess by word or act their faith therein. If there are any circumstances which permit an exception, they do not now occur to us.
______________________
In the result, we do not need to politicize citizenship further and we do not need to create a situation where people have to trace their lines back to the Mayfower.
$6 BILLION a year for anchor babies.
Other Western countries, the UK and Austrailia for example, have repealed this ridiculous law that only ENCOURAGES illegal activity and abuse to our system.
Not America though. We're chumps. Email your senator and tell him to support repealing this law.
The child should not be considered to be an American citizen if it's mother was an illegal.She should take her kid and go home.
There is no awkward position, the parents are given the choice of leaving their child(ren) or taking them with. It is known as parental rights. The problem is when the infant is allowed to "sponsor" the parents. When the child is an adult they can return to the US and when they can demonstrate the financial ability to support their parents THEN they can sponsor their parents to come here.
your information is incorrect. just because they have the baby in the states does not make the child a citizen. one of the parents has to be living there or be a american citizen. i have been through all this. i live in denmark and am american married to a danish citizen and the embassy told me if a child is born in another country just for short stay or vacation it does not make them american. but one of the parents must by blood be american or have obtained american citizenship for the child to get citizenship. i have not given up mine so my child will have both citizenships.
if i was to travel to germany on the weekend and go into labor, that would not make the child any more german then me. it just doesnt work like that. i dont understand why people thinkthat. i also have friend born in japan, both parents american, but born there because they worked there for a short time. they are not citizens because the parents never became citizens.
The Immigration information post by website user , MyTend.com not guarantee correctness.
More Immigration Questions and Answers ...