Birthright Citizenship

[Spindrift]

Steve king just introduced a bill to amend the federal definition of citizenship.

As of now, the text of the bill is not yet available

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c112:H.R.140:

but it should be up by next week.

How much money is this going to waste? This is like a frivolous lawsuit. They should send King an invoice for all the costs involved with this bill after it gets declared unconstitutional faster than he can say 'anchor baby'.

 

[Alferd_Packer]

Changing the way words are defined changes the 14th amendment. The Constitution describes how it is to be changed, and this is not the right way.

It's even stupider than that. Changing the way a legal term is defined in court sets a precedence for future legal actions. Thus, in the future, all an illegal would have to do is to state that the government does not have the jurisdiction to deport him.

This bill appears to be a sham.

Of course it is. It’s just an effort to gin up the base to try and push through a constitutional amendment. Oh, and BTW, did they mention that they want to rewrite the privileges and immunities, due process and equal protection clauses also?

Let’s (tea) Party like it’s 1859!!!

 

[Alferd_Packer]

And so it continues.

This time Tea party / Libertarian darling, Rand paul is proposing an an amendment to change the 14th amendment, or something. . .

Sen. David Vitter, R-La., and Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ken., are jointly introducing a "resolution that would amend the Constitution" -- not an amendment -- to deny citizenship to anyone born in the United States "unless at least one parent is a legal citizen, legal immigrant, active member of the Armed Forces or a naturalized legal citizen."

http://www.slate.com/BLOGS/blogs/we...roduce-birthright-citizenship-resolution.aspx

 

[Arus808]

And so it continues.

This time Tea party / Libertarian darling, Rand paul is proposing an an amendment to change the 14th amendment, or something. . .



http://www.slate.com/BLOGS/blogs/we...roduce-birthright-citizenship-resolution.aspx

yeah. and like all of these "resolutions" once its pointed out to these morons, that you can't do anything to the US CONSTITUTION unless its an AMENDMENT, all they are doing is a thinly disguised "Well we tried" approach, to save face.

 

[Alferd_Packer]

The Arizona Birthright repeal bill is stalled in committee.

http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/opinions/articles/2011/02/09/20110209wed2-09.html

 

[Arus808]

Good.

 

[Alferd_Packer]

South Dakota's and Montana's anti-14th amendment bills seem destined for the shredder as well.

http://www.alternet.org/news/149859...ion_denying_citizenship_to_u.s.-born_children

 

[Alferd_Packer]

On the other hand, Oklahoma's birthright bill has passed though the first committee along with another bill for asset forfiture of illegal aliens.

http://newsok.com/okla-senate-panel-oks-tough-anti-immigration-bills/article/3541090

 

[mrgrouch]

good question.

how many illegal aliens have used birthright citizenship of their child, to become legal?

i thought the whole argument against illegal immigration was the "illegal" part, but i see the problem is immigrants becoming "legal".

on the other hand, it's ridiculous to think that a woman will plan a trip to the u.s. only so she could deliver a baby there with the hope that 21 years later she will be sponsored by her child... i mean... think about it... twenty-one years!

by the way, did you know immigration restricts pregnant women from certain countries from entering the u.s. if they are in their last trimester?

cheers