Citizenship from birth is challenged on the right

[groovedaddy]

At a breakfast on Thursday in Washington, Senator Mitch McConnell, the Senate minority leader, tried to tamp down a controversy that started when Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina, questioned the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, which grants the right to citizenship to anyone born in the United States.

“I am not aware of anybody who has come out in favor of altering the 14th Amendment,” Mr. McConnell said.

But Mr. Graham, speaking on Fox News last week, said it was “a mistake” to allow American-born children of illegal immigrants to become citizens automatically, a practice known as birthright citizenship. He said that along with a plan to grant legal status to millions of illegal immigrants, he would also amend the 14th Amendment as a way of discouraging future unauthorized immigration.

Throughout the week Mr. Graham stood firm on his proposal. “We can’t just have people swimming across the river having children here — that’s chaos,” he said Wednesday in another interview with Fox News.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/07/us/politics/07fourteenth.html?th&emc=th

[justanaverageguy]

1. Ok, but here's the million dollar question that I don't know the answer

to. Maybe you can help.

I think we can agree that it is a proper function and responsibility of the government of any country to regulate immigration into said country. If not then why even bother having borders?

If a country has a strict policy that ANYBODY born in the country is automatically a citizen and can not be deported, doesn't that then give de facto citizenship to the parent(s)? I mean you can't deport the baby. You can't rip the baby from the parents, so if you deport them then you are also deporting the baby, which you can't do. See what I mean?

Doesn't that fly in the face of one of the primary functions of the federal government? Does it not become a way for non-citizens to bypass the normal immigration policies? And if you have this being done in great numbers can't it become a problem? If it becomes a problem how do you fix it?

I get real edgy anytime anyone wants to change the constitution, but how do you fix this problem without the change?

With all that being said the above question is premised on "anchor babies" actually being a problem. I don't that it is. I have not read up on the statistics. I'm not sure if one or one million "anchor babies" are born here a year or what the pros/cons are. I'm just asking, if it were a problem (which some think it is I guess) how would you fix it?

[groovedaddy]

2. Crack down on employers and illegal immigration will stop. n.t

[justanaverageguy]

3. But then what do you do with the illegal immigrant that has

had the baby and may have more? I can't hire her because all of sudden I'm the biggest asshole in the world if I do and a fair amount of people on this website would want to put me in jail for it. You won't or can't deport them. I guess they can live on food stamps and welfare, which is still probably a step up from her life in Mexico so she stays here a drain on our economy with little hope of ever becoming really productive. So great now we have a de facto citizen that is likely to never get deported, will not likely leave on her own, can't get a job, and a child that is forced to be raised in object poverty that stands a better than average chance of winding up in jail.

[groovedaddy]

4. If the parents HAD to go back from where they came, they would probably take their kids with them.nt

[justanaverageguy]

5. Of course they would. What parent wouldn't?

Why would the HAVE to go back? Quite likely living here on welfare and unemployed is better than where they came from. I wouldn't expect them to go back on their own.

I don't think deporting the parents would stand against any legal challenge, because to deport the parents means that you will be deporting the child too. The child (and any child born thereafter) has constitutional protection, via the 14th adm, to not be deported. He is a citizen and as such can not be deported.

So we end up with two de facto citizens raising their child (who is in fact as citizen) in poverty because they can't find work because everyone wants to put any potential employer in jail for hiring them. So they never become productive and the child has a better than average chance of ending up in jail or on drugs.

ON EDIT

I did a quick Google search on the issue. Apparently, although I'm not completely sure, the parents can achieve some legal status until their child turns 21, or until their youngest American born child turns 21. If true I guess that negates my point that they can not work and be productive. But then you create a situation where we're potentially deporting people that have been leading productive lives for 21 years or more in this country and now roots in the community. That's not a good idea, but if you don't you are allowing a short circuit to citizen ship. Just sneak over and have a kid and you are in like Flynn!!!

Like I said before, I'm not sure what the solution is. I'm not comfortable changing the constitution, but if this is going on in any kind of numbers it's a real problem.

[groovedaddy]

7. I'm not a lawyer and don't know what the legal standing is of people who entered

this country illegaly but subsequently gave birth to a U.S. citizen. I still think that if the parents were forced to leave, they would take their legal U.S. citizen child (children) with them.

Besides the legal ramifications, there is the sheer size of the problem and cost of deporting millions of people. This is ultimately why they will be allowed to stay and gain citizenship.
But at what point do you decide: "Our borders just don't mean anything any more?"

Rolling back NAFTA would probably help, as it seemed to have been a main driver of immigration.
And, at whatever point those who've been here illegally, gain standing, do we then crack down on employers for subsequent violations of the law?

[justanaverageguy]

8. But you can't force the parents to leave

Because you force the parent's to leave, you are also forcing the child to leave. The child is a US Citizen. It is unconstitutional to require him to leave. So you have to let the parents stay.

I'm absolutely against rounding up millions of people and deporting them. Here's what I think should happen

1. SECURE THE DAMN BORDER!!! I hate to sound like a repub, but the reality of the situation is that we have millions of people entering our country illegally across our southern border. It needs to be secured or as you said above "Our borders just don't mean anything any more?"

2. Path to citizenship for all illegal immigrants that are here. Unlike my more conservative friends I don't think there is any need to get them to pay back taxes or fines or the like. Let's get them assimilated as soon as possible so they can become productive tax paying, law abiding citizens. Making them pay back taxes and fines just keeps them underground that much longer. However, I would add that if they commit a violent crime they still be subject to deportation. My amnesty would not apply to current illegals that are convicted felons.

3. Yes, crack down on employers employing illegals. Particularly in the agricultural, meat packing, and construction industries

[LostHighway]

10. I think you're front loading the question

By assuming that people coming to the United States that have babies here are naturally just here temporarily, or are here illegally. Birthright citizenship applies to children of people who have work visas and green cards and have been long term residents as well as folks who are here illegally. There's no fear that people having work visas and jobs will suddenly claim citizenship, even though their kids most likely have dual citizenship. I think there's this strange assumption that pregnant women will swim across the Rio Grande and give birth, then....take their kids back to Mexico where they'll be Mexican citizens with dual citizenship? Usually folks, legal or illegal, who have a kid in the United States or in any other country usually have ties and plans, most likely have jobs, and are not just there one day and gone the next. If they want their kid to be born in the U.S., they're likely to want to be around to raise said kid in the U.S. The point is that there is such a thing as being a 'resident alien', and it's not as though having a kid here while not being here legally is really any different than doing so and having a visa or a green card, except that it's a term and a name that's hot button. I'm sure there are people working the visa system too, but since they're not, quote, "illegal", we don't hear much about them.

[justanaverageguy]

6. A little more perspective to our conversation

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/us/2010/08/11/ac.tuchman.anchor.babies.cnn?hpt=C2

According to this new story 70% of all children are born to undocumented mothers. That actually surprised me since this hospital is in Ft. Worth in NE Texas. Not nearly as close to the border as say El Paso, San Antonio, or even Houston.

That sounds like a lot to me.

[zbdent]

9. makes ya wonder how many RWers would pass the "voting rights" test ...

you know, where you have to prove that you know about your country so that you can vote.

If making voters pass a test was approved (and found constitutional). AND YOU DAMN WELL BETTER MAKE SURE THAT THE TEST IS STANDARDIZED ... since they all want to make sure the public school tests are standardized, right?

No "bye" for whitey ... like the "good old days" before the civil rights were put in place ...

[Name removed]

11. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.