Huckabee vows to defy birthright citizenship (by amending the Constitution)

Source: Washington Times

Mike Huckabee wants to amend the Constitution to prevent children born in the U.S. to illegal aliens from automatically becoming American citizens, according to his top immigration surrogate — a radical step no other major presidential candidate has embraced.

Mr. Huckabee, who won last week's Republican Iowa caucuses, promised Minuteman Project founder James Gilchrist that he would force a test case to the Supreme Court to challenge birthright citizenship, and would push Congress to pass a 28th Amendment to the Constitution to remove any doubt.



Read more: http://washingtontimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080108/NATION/311698216/1001

this man will be the next President.

He's got enormous political skills, and he could emote his way right into the White House if we aren't careful.

Huck is now officially replacing Giuliani as the R candidate I'm most concerned about.

The megachurch voters could win it for him, that's for damn sure.

Too many on our side are dismissive towards this guy... Huckabee is a HUGE threat and we have to take him on and knock him out early in the game (rather than ripping apart our own candidates).

And, if the earth stops spinning on its axis and this lunatic religious nutjob gets into 1600 Penn Ave, you won't see my arse for dust...I'll be loooooooooooooooooong gone...

misplaced

and 'mark my words' = tripe.

Dems are too cocky now. Waaay too cocky.

I think we at DU underestimate him.

we sure are doing our part. He would wipe the floor with Hillary. If there is a Republican not named McCain in the oval office in 2009, we'll have nobody to blame but ourselves.

An election amendment eliminating the electoral college fiasco and establishing the direct vote for President and Vice-President.

to require one parent be a United States Citizen. The purpose of the XIV Amendment was to get around the Dred Scott Ruling by the Supreme Court. The court decision was that there was no legal way for a slave or ex-slave could ever become a citizen.

A piece of phony crap that will never pass to make it look like he's working.

Enforce the laws on the books.

by itself can't amend the constitution..it takes a bunch of states to pass the amendment first.

called by the states, amendments to the Constitution start out in Congress. It's the President who has no official role in the process, although Presidents can call for leadership in any direction they want to.

Ok, going to play devil's advocate here, we want employers to be penalized for hiring illegal aliens, but we're against birthright citizenship? Don't both things propel people across our borders? Or is it only because an illegal alien can take a job from us by being here, while a birthright citizen child of illegal alien parents cannot take away our citizenship?

the man is dangerous, but I have no confidence that Americans are smart enough to see through him and avoid him with a 10-foot pole. In fact, I've come to regard American voters as among the stupidest creatures on the planet. If they think this shithead is appropriate in any way as a presidential candidate, dog help us.

but I do...The US is one of the few(if not only) countries in the world that allows automatic citizenship just by being born here. This policy had it place but the time has come to update the constitution to the 21st century....and this is not immigrant bashing...i do NOT advocate for the removal of undocumented immigrants in the least...i believe this is one piece in the puzzle to solving the so-called immigration problem....

Please explain the criteria you would use to decide who has the right to citizenship and who doesn't?

And then ask yourself whether your parents would qualify, or your parents' parents, and on up the family tree.

We need to stop the migration of people out of their countries. I believe migration out of a country inhibits it development. I also believe that non-documented workers are suppressing wages in the US. I live in Texas and the entire home construction business is done by undocumented workers, thereby driving wages down. I also believe we need to stop this crazy idea to grow at all costs. Cheap labor enables developers to build cheap houses that are are a major contributor to sprawl and environmental degradation.

and are you a a descendant of immigrants?

to the US in 1954 from Mexico. My maternal great-great-grandfather immigrated from Europe. I was born in New York.....

I am vexed why people on this site would be so dismissive of the idea to amend the constitution? Would no one be in favor of amending the 2nd amendment?

I guess all of Europe is wrong about immigration because they don't allow automatic citizenship?

Where the laws are more to your liking?

I'm happy with the constitution the way it is.

to my liking....like not letting anyone over 18 purchase a gun, like real environmental laws to stop global warming...like no death penalty...like a real progressive tax system....like universal health care...like paid time off for the birth of a child...

tell me how you feel about intelligent design, prayer in schools, gay marriage, Jim Crow laws...


:popcorn:

intelligent design is nothing more than creationism which should never be taught in any public school.

prayer is school is against the constitutions separation of church & state, again should never be
allowed in public schools.

I believe marriage is between two people and the sex of the people shouldn't make one difference in the eyes of the government.

I believe gay people should be able to serve openly in the military.

Jim Crow law were evil and should never have been allowed to take place.

What else do you want to know?

So, why are you supporting what amounts to a Jim Crow law then?

Eliminating Jus Solis (right by birthplace) is a grandfather clause.

Because denying citizenship to children born here, based on their parents' citizenship status is Jim Crow, no more no less.

Your painting this as an issue of race, whereas I see it as one of migration and wages. I didn't say we should treat the children any differently based on their parents' citizenship...so your basically saying that any country that doesn't grant citizenship to children born within their borders is a racist country? Why is the US right on this issue and most other countries wrong? The founding fathers got it wrong on slavery? They got it wrong on the second amendment? I could go down a long list of things that the founding fathers got wrong....I'm not part of the slimy campaign to demonize immigrants like the GOP has been conducting, I just believe some parts of our constitution need to be amended.

Personally I don't give rat spit about what Europe does, I live in the United States. Are there ways that we can improve things here, most definitely, but basing it on a European model isn't the only answer!

I'm positively not for sending anyone home (Could I really look any one in the eye and say "Get out!?" No, I couldn't.) However, I think putting an end to automatic citizenship for anchor babies is just one part of the solution of massive undocumented immigration.

We have a real depression of wages here in Texas, and we are at the point where American citizens need to be bilingual to work at many jobs in this state, making the employment situation even worse. I can't remember the last time I went to a doctor's office where at least half of the staff wasn't spanish speaking. Even my doctor from India has had THREE different hispanic receptionists! While undergoing cancer treatment, my oncology center fired one spanish speaking receptionist and hired another.

Being bilingual in this country should be an asset, not a necessity for American citizens.

And why is it the best way just because it's another country?

This country is the only superpower. Why should it mend its ways to be like other countries?

It is also diverse and enormous and free. Other countries aren't, that's why they can keep track of who was born of whom.

we are in the deep shit that we are in.

are you even paying attention?

and i also agree with removing the automatic citizenship clause.

damn that du, can't we EVER march lockstep?

My father is a drywaller. In the late 1970’s he had a decent job. He was a union worker, paid his dues and made enough money to support his family in a cookie cutter, lower to middle class neighborhood. Then, his profession began to get flooded with illegal immigrants (drywall is the number 2 profession of illegals, behind farming). Suddenly, my family went from a nice middle class existence to one of struggle. We went from eating good meals to eating generic mac and cheese. We went from buying our clothes to my mother having to make our clothes. My father went from getting raises to getting annual layoffs and DECREASES to pay. My father went from working 45 hours a week to working 70-80 hours a week (by taking on side jobs). My father went from a healthy body to terrible shoulders, arthritis throughout his whole body, an artificial knee and many other health ailments. My father and my family had to endure all of this not because of anything we did. Rather, we had to deal with it because of a group of people who broke our laws.


How in the hell can a progressive, on a progressive website, no be opposed to a DIRECT cause of something they claim to oppose (the dwindling middle class)?

I was a roofer in Texas for three years. Wages were good. The only reason for the recent layoffs is due to the housing market going belly up.

For every anecdotal story about how "they" steal our jobs, my own story comes to quite a different conclusion.


"...progressive, on a progressive website, no be opposed to a DIRECT cause of...?"

Because I value human beings more than imaginary red and blue lines on a map.

"Because I value human beings more than imaginary red and blue lines on a map." However, all we are doing is turning a blind eye and hoping things get better. Harvard did a study a couple years ago that showed the AVERAGE American was around 8-10% better off with illegal immigrants. However, the details showed the rich were well in excess of 10% and MANY of the lower to middle class folks were WORSE off. Thus, I don't really think your view means you want to destroy the middle class so some dirt poor people can be a little better off. A great example of this is The Grapes of Wrath.

I think we need to work WITH Mexico and provide financial support to improve their economic structure. The current method is simply pulling people down instead of us helping to bring people up.

I grew up in a family of blue collar workers - including masonry, roofing, and painting.

You can't make a living doing those jobs anymore. Thankfully, my generation went to college, so my brothers don't have to compete with undocumented immigrants for slave wages. The corporatists are destroying the middle class, and so called progressives are giving them a helping hand. They think they're the true progressives. Well, they're not. Europe is filled with real progressives, and they don't think they have to destroy the middle classs in the process.

And I don't get it either.

Except maybe some of those posting in favor of Illegals are illegal themselves? :shrug:

You should outlaw interference in other countries' democracies first. Along with helping dictators' vote rigging, torture and proxy wars. You'll get what you want faster.

Texas is a right-to-work stat and, most importantly, there are NO UNIONS. Blame the employers for not paying a decent wage and not the employees.

for the past several thousand years, people have been migrating. The only way to stop it is for every country to become a police state.

Wages will be the way they are regardless of WHERE people are. The best economy gets the immigrants. The anti-immigrant people would have the U.S. become a third world country just so they don't have to have foreigners around - that is, if you ever really see them outside of Lou Dobbs.

The Soviet Union didn't have a problem with immigrants. There's a reason for that. Most dictatorships can boast the same.

"and the entire home construction business is done by undocumented workers"

Wrong. I was a roofer for three years until I finally found an office job to my liking. Most of the roofers I worked with were your every-day, trashy meth-heads.

Unless you've done a peer-reviewed survey or worked in the industry, you're blowing the same hot air that most of the AM radio talk show hosts do...

this is insanely xenophobic

I'm assuming you replied to the wrong post.

:hi:

just the logic of the answer xenophobic.

hi xipe totec! :hug:

..after emerging from the womb the new-born child has to prove that it's parents are citizens in order to be considered a citizen itself?

Get the fuck outta here with that crap...

that marriage thing too. No more citizenship for spouses of Legal Residents. And any brown people getting citizenship for fighting in Iraq is completely wrong....especially for their spouses or kids. The odds are pretty good they'll get fucked up in Iraq, but we don't need their families draining our resources.
:sarcasm:

I can almost the imagine the day when all the jobs have gone to Mexico and U.S. citizens are resorted to crossing the border to get a job and feed their family.

:crazy:

Perhaps you mean jawohl?

and -- -why shouldn't Mexico be using its money all these years to support jobs for Mexicans rather than sending their money to America to support a war???

investment, banking, or business, or protection of local manufacturing and agriculture
just one cash-crop plantation paradise after another, with some roving industry shuttling between China, India, Vietnam, the Philippines--whoever can lower their wages and social and environmental protections the lowest, because Rand, Friedman, and the whole public-appealing gaggle of crack-brained Minnesingers for capital say that's "freedom"

As I began Naomi Klein's book "Shock Doctrine" I realized that I knew about most of the stuff she was writing about and tolerating it all coming at me at one moment was sending my blood pressure up so I decided to first deal with her "conclusions" . . . I'm still working on it but she is stressing that Latin America has been working their way out of the mess you're pointing to ---

There is, of course, social rebellion about this savage capitalism all over the world ---
People want democratic socialism not predatory capitalism ---

And I have every confidence we'll fight our way thru ---
the problem is all they have already destroyed .... namely the planet itself and all nature upon it!

Why have an enormous unincluded disaffected population with third and fourth generation illegal aliens?

Why is this important to you? What bad effect has it had upon you? Nothing.

There comes a point where you draw the line. We draw the line at birth in the U.S. Besides that, we're not going to have tests of citizenship. It has served us well for more than two centuries.

The Saudis do this to the Palestinians. We want to become more like them?

Other countries do it - yeah, and other countries aren't as successful, are they? Or they are less diverse to begin with (and often fight more amongst themselves even though they are less diverse).

:shrug:

The original grandfather clauses were contained in the Jim Crow laws used from 1890 to 1910 in much of the Southern United States to prevent blacks, Native Americans, and certain whites from voting. Earlier prohibitions on voting in place prior to 1870 were nullified by the Fifteenth Amendment. In response, some states passed laws requiring poll taxes and/or supposed literacy tests from would-be voters. An exemption to these requirements was made for all persons allowed to vote before the American Civil War, and any of their descendants. The term was born from the fact that the law tied the then-current generation's voting rights to those of their grandfathers.

After the U.S. Supreme Court found Jim Crow laws with such exemptions unconstitutional in Guinn v. United States, a strict application of poll taxes and/or literacy tests would have disenfranchised some whites, and sometimes did so in early years. However, as time passed, states with Jim Crow laws chose not to enforce them against any whites.

These laws had the effect of disenfranchising blacks, Native Americans, and certain whites, until the ratification of the Twenty-fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution, the 1965 Voting Rights Act, and a 1966 Supreme Court ruling that eliminated most legal barriers to black voting.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grandfather_clause

Amendment XIV - Citizenship Rights. Ratified 7/9/1868.

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. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

What bothers me most is that "he would force a test case to the Supreme Court to challenge birthright citizenship, and would push Congress to pass a 28th Amendment to the Constitution to remove any doubt."

The amendment is clear. "All persons born or naturalized in the United States" are citizens. You can disagree all you want about whether or not they should be but how in hell do you expect to win some kind of test case?

Maybe he should try reading the Constitution sometime.

but if they find an egregious enough case (perhaps involving terrorism, or pedophilia, or a MBWW (missing blong white woman)) they can stir up enough emotion to get an amendment passed. I would only support such an amendment if it was retroactive.

<<<<<<<Maybe he should try reading the Constitution sometime.>>>>>>>>>

he has no intention of following it.....just like jr and company. It is simply a 'quaint' document whose time has come and gone.

should say it all...but there's that pesky little "and subject to the jurisdiction thereof."

First you have to be born or naturalized here. Second, you have to be subject to the jurisdiction thereof. What does that mean? If it just means being born here, the statement is rather redundant, don't you think?

Subject to that jurisdiciton rather than ours, and is no longer guaranteed citizenship.

The whole amending is talking about rights that can't be abridged. How can you abridge someone's rights who isn't even in this country. Reading the entire amending "and subject to the jurisdiction thereof" means that something else is required other than naturalization or birth.

and he said it was not true. He is not for amending the constitution for this.

All non-Christians have their citizenship revoked and are deported to Antarctica.

He will put pressure on the GOP establishment with this one. He could start to win over the secular fascist crowd.

God help us, if he gets a foothold in the White House.

The President has no legal role in amending the Constitution.

an election year.

always quaint. always cute. and always right on time.

let's see, we've had them pound their fists about a flag burning amendment .... a gay marriage amendment .... a no abortions amendment.

they get so worked up, you can practically see the spittle in the corners of their mouths. and the do absolutely nothing about it after the election's over. they know what work it would be to change the constitution, and republicans are not exactly inclined toward hard work.

more horseshit from the right.

and put them all back on the shelf, to wait for the next election..

some people do take advantage of this right!

This press release is from Huckabee's website:

News Release: Presidential Candidate Mike Huckabee statement on Constitutional Amendment regarding citizenship birthright
January 08, 2008
LITTLE ROCK, AR -- Former Arkansas Governor and Presidential candidate Mike Huckabee has issued the following comment in response to a Washington Times article reporting he would amend the Constitution in connection to children born in the U.S. to illegal aliens:

"I do not support an amendment to the Constitution that would prevent children born in the U.S. to illegal aliens from automatically becoming American citizens. I have no intention of supporting a constitutional amendment to deny birthright citizenship."

Wonder what caused him to suddenly change his mind:

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZTUxZjNkYmIxYTAyNzJiZTEzNjJmNzI2OTMyOWNmMzI=

Good lucking passing that amendment through a Democratic controlled Congress and Democrat legislatures in the country, Huckabee.

And seriously speaking, he's just throwing red meat the Minuteman style base. He knows DAMN well that he couldn't politically make that happen.

...also denies citizenship to children of illegal aliens. The law reads

Acquisition of German citizenship by the fact of being born in Germany

Children who are born in Germany to foreign nationals will receive German citizenship when one of the respective child's parents has resided lawfully in Germany for at least eight years and holds entitlement to residence or has had an unlimited residence permit for at least three years. Under the new law, such children acquire German citizenship at birth. In most cases, they will also acquire their parents' citizenship under the principle of descent (depending upon the other country's laws). For this reason, such children will have to decide within five years of turning 18 – in other words, before their 23rd birthday – whether they want to retain their German citizenship or their other citizenship.

http://www.london.diplo.de/Vertretung/london/en/06/other__legal__matters/Reform__Germanys__citizenship__seite.html

Note that this a "reform" of the preexisting law that did not automatically grant citizenship to children born in Germany of legal aliens. Huckabee's proposal is not out of line with Germany's law, or the laws of many other countries, which are more restrictive than US law.

In any case, I seriously doubt that the Huckster's proposal will pass.

for rethugs and indies to vote dem. Most Americans are not that cold hearted and won't associate with him.

Even on DU?

Egad. If I could only go back to the happy belief that most people wouldn't do this like you hold.

I'd like to amend the Constitution to prevent phony Baptist preachers from running for office.

"End birthright citizenship. As long as illegal immigrants know their children born here will be citizens, the incentive to enter the U.S. illegally will remain strong."

http://www.ronpaul2008.com/issues/border-security-and-immigration-reform/


The racist fucks...

Huckabee's decision to amend the Fourteenth Amendment shows the continuing march of Republican thought off the right edge into the religious and state tyrannies our forbears (And not a few Baptists) vigorously opposed. Under Reagan, the rest of us learned that the Republicans hated Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal. Under Gee Dubya Bush, we learned that the Republicans not only hated the New Deal, they also hated Theodore Roosevelt's Square Deal. With Mike Huckabee's candidacy, we're now learning that today's Republicans not only hate the New Deal and the Square Deal, but they also hate Reconstruction. What's next--legalizing slavery a la Rushdoony? Patents of Nobility? Government-imposed religious qualifications for public office? An Inquisition not just for so-called "cults" like the Latter Day Saints and the Unitarians, but also for non-evangelical Protestants and liturgical Christians like the Roman Catholics, Episcopalians, and the various Orthodox sects?

If you are born here, you are automatically a U.S. citizen.

that s what we really need!!

And his family. Shit stuffing their face pigs. They live on shit. Wow another of your posts I followed up on. :hi: Maybe I like you too much!

NT

NT

there is no way congress would achieve 2/3 majority needed to ammend the constitution. One reason is the Cubans in Florida would go ape over this ammendment (And we know what power THEY have). And another reason is that legal hispanics have become the 800 pound gorilla in the political room. A lot of pukes in the west lost their seats because of hispanic backlash.

I don't discount that Huckabee might get the Rep. nom. but win in the general election?

The guy makes Bush seem smart.

"In this classic bit from April 2001, Canadian satirist Rick Mercer travels down to Arkansas to ask some good folks about Canada’s efforts to protect their national capitol building from the effects of global warming. A former Governor offers his congratulations on the efforts to preserve their “National Igloo”."

video at http://www.crooksandliars.com/2007/12/14/huckabee-congratulates-canada-on-preserving-its-national-igloo-2/

Contrary to the common assumption, the 14th Amendment does not actually require that children of aliens be granted citizenship:





Even today, this clause has been interpreted by the courts as intending to deny citizenship to children born to parents who are in certain categories of foreign nationals. A federal statute upheld by SCOTUS is really all it would take to change the current definition of a "born citizen".

And the President can't do it alone.

This is not such a big problem that it needs to be addressed by such drastic measures. If they start a movement for it, let's start up the ERA movement again just to annoy them.

The problem is exaggerated in order to appeal to the nativism of the kook-aid drinkers of the right. As usual, they won't get their result. It's not as if abortion is again illegal after 20 years of right wing frenzy on the subject. This won't happen, either.