'Birthright citizenship' will be target of House GOP majority

Time for the nutters to tinker with the Constitution.


As one of its first acts, the new Congress will consider denying citizenship to the children of illegal immigrants who are born in the United States.

Those children, who are now automatically granted citizenship at birth, will be one of the first targets of the Republican-led House when it convenes in January.

GOP Rep. Steve King of Iowa, the incoming chairman of the subcommittee that oversees immigration, is expected to push a bill that would deny "birthright citizenship" to such children.



Read more: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/11/18/103946/birthright-citizenship-will-be.html#ixzz15h3UarcT

It will require a Constitutional amendment to change that.

They don't have the votes for an amendment.

I'm not.

Some conservatives (though mostly conservative politicians pushing this as a law rather than an amendment) have been claiming lately that this can be undone with a simple law, but they're lying.

When the 14th amendment was written, congress wrote it specifically to undo the Dred Scott Supreme Court decision hated by many northerners, that said, among other things, that slaves and their descendants weren't US citizens and therefore weren't protected by the constitution.

Congress purposely made the citizenship test something set in stone that a judge couldn't simply reinterpret for being too vague.

Under the US constitution, if you are born under US jurisdiction, you are a US citizen, regardless of citizenship of your parents. So unless conservatives want to argue that foreigners in the US aren't under the jurisdiction of US laws, there's no logical loopholes around it. Unless of course conservatives are advocating that cops don't have the right to arrest foreigners who rob banks in the US, because of lack of jurisdiction over the bank the foreigners are robbing, but if we don't have jurisdiction then who does?

We lost a lot of state legislatures this time around.

How, they aren't going to get a constitutional amendment - the nutters are loud but they don't outnumber the sane.

Not trying to be snarky here

But I mean really...

I think I get what you're saying about the self-aggrandizing conceit of American citizenship. But the reality for millions of children who would be affected by such a change in our Constitution is that they would be denied rights to education, work, and political enfranchisement. It's actually a big deal.

Although I get what you're saying.

You don't have to 'deny' people a right to a job if there aren't any, or a right to education if you can't afford it. And as for voting....how's that working out?

It creates a permanent underclass and that's why proponents want to do it.

Stripping these children of their birthright citizenship is equal to stripping them of their right to vote..........it's a slippery slope from there.

If the repukes are no longer able to count the votes to their advantage, they'll just change the rules so that people most likely to vote for Dems are stripped of their rights to vote.

makes sense

the other reasons that these knuckle-draggers will come up with to strip Americans not of European descent of the birthright citizenship.

If this gets passed, look for attempts to ban services to even legal immigrants. It's the thin bit of the wedge, here.

Are essentially advocating for the end of such rights for the children of ALL immigrants, legal or otherwise.

its not like getting your cronies to do what you say.

and lead straight to Obama winning 80% of a massive turnout Hispanic vote in 2012.

like to see them try. :evilgrin:

Why not remove that incentive, if we really want to stem illegal immigration?

For everyone except the people doing the employing, of course. They want maximum profit for minimum outlay for labor, but if that avenue is cut off to them, maybe they'd start hiring Americans again. If nobody in the U.S. can get away with hiring undocumented workers, they'll go home, and try again by applying for a work visa.

It would sure work a hell of a lot better than building a Berlin Wall around the whole country.

And highly visible, public enforcement of employment laws might remove some of the stigma people attach to immigrant workers. People aren't above hiring them, and then referring to them as "criminals".

Clearly, mandatory eVerify would go a long ways to disincentivizing illegal immigration, but refusing to grant the benefits that normally accompany citizenship or legal entry would also help.

That's a tough one to pull off.

everything else you said is correct.

Though I imagine it will come as news to these jackasses that it will take an Amendment to change this.

But I don't think we'll see another one like that without a time limit.

:blush:

They hope to do an end-run around the Constitution and the amendment process by passing a law that re-interprets the 14th Amendment's jurisdiction clause.

Their argument is that undocumented immigrants are not truly "subject to the jurisdiction of" the United States if they are in an 'illegal' status; some claim a loophole because an illegal immigrant cannot owe "full" allegiance to the U.S., and therefore their children born here are not entitled to birthright citizenship.

A simple explanation:

If we can legally arrest them, try them, convict them, etc.? Wouldn't this make arresting them for anything besides illegal immigration impossible?

the Statue of Liberty for the Eiffel Tower??

for real Republicans will change nothing I tell you....