Steve King Moves Forward on Bill to End Birthright Citizenship

[pampango]

Source: CBS News

Republican Rep. Steve King of Iowa, marking his first day as head of a House immigration panel, introduced a bill on Wednesday to end the practice of birthright citizenship.

The bill would amend section 301 of the Immigration and Nationality Act to clarify those classes of individuals born in the United States who are nationals and citizens of the United States at birth. So far, King's bill has three co-sponsors listed: Reps. Phil Gingrey (R-Ga.), Gary Miller (R-Calif.) and Rob Woodall (R-Ga.).

It's generally thought that the 14th Amendment provides a constitutional guarantee of citizenship for anyone born in the United States -- known as "birthright citizenship" -- but King told Hotsheet last year that he does not interpret the 14th Amendment that way.

Concerns about illegal immigration last year spurred some Republicans to call for a debate over birthright citizenship, and Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) said last year he was considering proposing a constitutional amendment so that children born in the U.S. to illegal immigrants would not automatically be citizens.

Read more: http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20027553-503544.html

---

And so it begins.

[backscatter712]

1. The Banana-Republican Party isn't even trying to hide their hypocrisy.

One day, they're making a dog-and-pony show out of reading the Constitution in Congress, and the next, they're passing this law that is such a bald-faced violation of the 14th Amendment that the only thing it'll do is waste taxpayer dollars in a court battle that can only end with the law being struck.

[mbperrin]

24. Can't fix stupid.

Good thing for King that literacy tests are not a requirement for holding office.

Dumb fucking bastard.

[glinda]

31. THIS was the intention of the reading of the Constitution from the beginning. It was to take it by

force and change it to meet their interpretation. You will see "God" in it sooner than you can blink. You will see civil rights rolled back. They are going to take complete and absolute charge of this Country with no return to any Dem power. Ever. Until we are bombed or invaded.

[Sal Minella]

2. Steve King on a House immigration panel.

Now I have a headache.

[The Wielding Truth]

13. Republicans need to stop putting people in places where they can do the most harm!

They must ask the new person what they are least qualified for.

[Sal Minella]

17. All I can think of is the "Fire Department" in Fahrenheit 451 --

The "Firemen" went around setting fire to books, wherever any were discovered.

So we have an immigration committee headed by someone who wants to execute immigrants.

Regulations committee headed by . . . .

must...go...take...aspirin...'scuze plz

[The Wielding Truth]

29. First to my mind. Foley and Brown and gw. All put where they could do the most harm.

There are too many more to post here. I really can only think of a couple of Republicans who have done anything to help our country or it's people.

They have been bent on suppressing us and freeing business cheats and they have no line,they have shown, that they will not cross.

[Parche]

3. its been that way since the beginning

Phil Gingrey is one of the biggest dooshbags in congress

[Spider Jerusalem]

4. It doesn't really matter how HE interprets the 14th Amendment;

it matters how the courts and specifically the Supreme Court interpret it.

Also, it's pretty unambiguous:

Section 1. 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.

[apnu]

25. Well if he wants to change it he can try to amend the Constitution

Good luck getting a 2/3 majority state ratification on that.

What a ding-bat.

[RC]

26. He probably thinks all that need to be done is for Congress to pass a law.

[TriplD]

44. That's not necessary with a Supreme Court...

that is ready to call an unconstitutional law Constitutional.

[ActDontReact]

5. Steve King

2 more years of the effort to dismantle progress in this country.

[meegbear]

6. He does not interpret the 14th Amendment that way?

D.C. is becoming Fucktard Central.

[DCKit]

7. Anchor babies are the new Gays. nt

[NuclearDem]

8. And watch the Republican constituency disappear

For some reason, I don't think most of the Teabaggers could pass a citizenship test.

[madrchsod]

9. look for the supremes to rule against the clause in the 14th

according to the spokesman for the supreme court`s right wing women are not covered in the 14th.

[MineralMan]

10. Let's see the original birth certificates, then for King's

parents and grandparents. He needs to prove that his own citizenship isn't based on his birth in the USA.

[hatrack]

11. United States vs. Wong Kim Ark - look it up sometime, Congrasshat King

And lots of luck overturning a 113-year-old precedent.

:eyes:

[Confusious]

34. If they amend the constititution

That's out the door.

That's what they are talking about doing, as far as I know.

On Edit: I guess this guy just wants a bill to change it. Others are talking about an amendment.

[HillWilliam]

12. What the wingnuts haven't stopped to consider

is that when the 14th goes and the ay-lee-yuns are prevented from having citizenship, so is everybody else. Including them. No birthright citizenship means none for anybody.

HTF do rightwingers even remember to breathe?

[Confusious]

35. No, not really

They could change it to say that one or both your parents have to be citizens or naturalized citizens.

Quite a few countries have that sort of citizenship. I believe that the United States is one of the few that has birthright citizenship.

[KingOfLostSouls]

14. Good, send Steve king and other republicans back to europe

we native americans are sick of these goddamn anchor babies who came over and took our jobs.

these ungrateful boat people who showed up on their mayflower and ended up screwing up our forests and homes

just look at all the goddamn trailer parks they put up.


end anchor babies. deport white people.

[Sal Minella]

18. Great post. n/t

[No Elephants]

15. Amendment XIV, Section 1.>>>>

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.




So, they will showboat, by reading it aloud and requiring every bill to reference it, then interpret the hell out of it.


I guess King is using the Scalia approach: the 14th amend. refers to freed slaves and maybe their descendants, period, full stop.


So, how does King interpret natural born citizen in Article II?

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.


Hmmmm?

[ttwiddler]

23. The really fun part

Scalia is well-known for his dislike of using legislative history when interpreting statutes (some skepticism is good, but his absolutist approach is stupid). If he holds true to this principle, which he's declared often enough, the plain text of the 14th amendment would invalidate the legislation. Given that he essentially called the militia clause of the 2d amendment "meaningless verbiage," it's very much an open question just how attached he is to his declared principles.

[yellowcanine]

16. I really hope they pass this with only Republican votes. It will drive even more Hispanics to the

Democratic Party.

[CreekDog]

19. .

.

[dogfacedboy]

20. Just another one of the New Washington Hillbillies puffing out it's chest.

[COLGATE4]

21. King's 'interpretation' of the 14th Amendment is about as interesting

as asking the same question of a Bonobo chimp at the zoo. All you'll likely get is shit flung at you.

[muriel_volestrangler]

22. "every House bill must cite the constitutional source of its authority"

That's what the Repubs are demanding. So, what does this bill say, since it wants to ignore the 14th amendment?

[unblock]

27. note that they don't require their constitutional cite to be correct.

they only require that there be one.

[glinda]

32. Right on target. They think convoluted so the whole interpretation will be down the Rabbit Hole.

[The Backlash Cometh]

28. But it's in the constitution? Will we get Scalia on our side with this one?

[bigworld]

30. My dad is pretty much a teabagger

and his parents came here from Austria before WW1. I don't know if they were legal or not, but I'd love to see the look on his face if I get to tell him that he, as a child of illegals, is not an American citizen.

[Confusious]

33. I wouldn't do that

Congress has no power to declare someone "not a citizen" retroactively.

No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.

[mikeytherat]

38. Congress has no power to modify the Constitution on a whim, either, but they're trying anyway.

mikey_the_rat

[Confusious]

42. And they'll fail, on both counts.

Not really sure what your point is.

[muntrv]

36. Sorry Stevie, your bill doesn't have more power than the Constitution.

[Mz Pip]

37. Why is he wasting our time?

The senate won't pass it and Obama won't sign it. Playing to the base of paranoid old white people who are scared of natural born people who don't look like them may work to get you re elected in your reactionary district but it won't change the ethnic diversity of this country. No matter what you hope for.

[Agent William]

39. OK, if he inserts 'natural' before born as to eliminate corporate personhood

I may be for that. That would be a real compromise, not a one sided give away that we have been lead to believe is compromise. Conservatives get another tool to hate Hispanics, thus further alienated that group, whilst we can get to end corporate citizenship....the odds of that happening are zero.

[Agent William]

40. I just need to add

That I was given citizenship to the UK through birthright, so me being for this in anyway says something. If the UK ended birthright citizenship in the 80s...I'd still be in Washington state right now...which isn't a bad thing, I'm just saying.

[meow2u3]

41. A Constitutional amendment is the only way to remove birthright citizenship

Any statute passed by Congress or a state will be struck down by the Supreme Court as unconstitutional--even by this ass-backwards Supreme Court.

meow2u3 to the repuke House: good luck trying to pass that law. It won't make it through the Senate.

[classysassy]

43. King and the court jesters aka republican party

The Arizona jesters are on your side,King Dipstick.