The Question of Birthright Citizenship

Pages: 1 2

When the open borders lobby runs out of excuses for amnesty, their final resort is to “do it for the children.”  Last year Nancy Pelosi told a crowd in San Francisco that “Our future is about our children” and, “Taking parents from their children … that’s un-American.”

When the Speaker of the House considers enforcing our immigration laws “un-American,” it becomes the constitutional duty of the States to stand against illegal immigration.  This is why I introduced SB 1070 into the Arizona legislature, which has prompted a much needed national debate about immigration.

Sure enough, we’ve heard the same complaints about separating families.  Congressman Raul Grijalva (D-AZ) put together a Congressional panel against SB 1070.  He trotted out ten-year-old Catherine Figueroa whose illegal alien parents had stolen identities of American citizens and were detained.  She sobbed lines that no doubt were scripted by her handlers: “Please help us, children don’t know what to do without their parents.”

I truly sympathize with Catherine, but her law-breaking parents are the ones responsible for her situation.  SB 1070 and all other immigration laws do not split up families.  Arizona Jan Brewer very sensibly pointed out that there is nothing stopping the children from going back with their parents to their nation of origin.

But the truth is that these people do not care about reuniting families. They simply use children like Catherine for cheap political gain.

She is not the first.  A few years ago, the poster child and poster mother for breaking immigration law under the guise of not “separating families” was Elvira Arellano and her son Saul.  Elvira, who had been deported in 1997, broke back into the country and obtained a fraudulent social security number.  In 2002, she was arrested for Social Security fraud, but due to our lax immigration courts, she was released and wasn’t ordered to see an immigration judge until 2006.

With these facts, most Americans would see this as yet another example of how we fail to enforce our laws.  But Elvira had an illegitimate son with an unknown father in 1999.  Under a misinterpretation of the 14th Amendment, Saul became a US Citizen.

Instead of going to court, Elvira holed herself up in Adalberto United Methodist Church in Chicago–which proclaimed iself a  “sanctuary”–and stayed there for a year.  Meanwhile, Saul travelled to Mexico where he spoke before the Mexican Congress to attack our laws.  Eventually, Elvira snuck out and was detained and deported.

She then started a group called La Familia Latina Unida (United Latino Family) in Mexico.  But instead of bringing her son with her, pro illegal alien activists have given him legal guardianship and they parade him across the country away from his mother.

This would not be a problem if we ended our absurd practice of giving birthright citizenship to the children of illegal aliens.

The 14th Amendment states “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.”  This clause was added specifically for the purpose of ensuring that the children of freed slaves would receive American citizenship.

The drafters of this Amendment made it very clear that this was not intended for illegal aliens.

Pages: 1 2

  • GOP_Sucks

    If you're born outside of the United States with having at least one American parent you are automatically an American citizen ( this is why the birthers are pathetic to take the benefit of the doubt away from Obama's qualification while McCain fits this criteria as well). You're qualifications to sponsor another relative for a green card is partially determined by the ratio of time spent living in the United States vs. abroad. Saying that, the arguement really isn't about the children being U.S. citizens but rather if the illegal parents have a right to reside in the U.S..and the answer is no. They simply have to be deported with the option of leaving the child in the U.S. under the custody of a legal resident or citizen or take the child with them. In any regard, the legal custodian shall bear financial responsibility for the child and not the state (welfare). The custodial parent is required to show proof of income 125% above the poverty level. Bottom line, the people responsible for these children have to show they can support them in order to stay in the U.S. .
    We are a welfare check for the rest of the world.

    • aspacia

      You are correct. Why the ad hominem moniker? It alienates rather than persuades.

      Send money to Numbers USA if you are against illegal immigration, I sure do.

      Even if legal, immigrants need sponsors, as my mother did, who was married to a WWII Vet. Yep, Dad, Grandpa and Grandma had to sponsor my Limey Mum before she could enter the land.

    • Boneshaker

      If born outside the USA with one parent a US citizen you may be considered a citizen under certain circumstances but you are not a "natural born citizen". That is one reason Obama is not legally qualified to sit in the White House as president. Another is that he has refused to produce a legitimate birth certificate proving that he was even born in the USA. If he has one, why would he refuse to show his birth certificate and put an end to all of the disagreement?

      • Stephen D.

        Funny that a birth certificate should be a non-issue for him. My wife, who is a "natural Born Citizen, and who has been driving for over 30 yrs. MUST produce a birth certificate and a certificate of marriage in order to renew her drivers license (in FL). I suggested she ask them "What if I say I'm an undocumented immigrant?" I wonder what criteria is used then.

      • Tom

        Correct, as ANY military brat born overseas to US Citizen parents can attest, being born overseas to TWO US Citizen parents, I too was BORN a citizen, however since it was on Canadian soil, and on a Canadian air force base, I am NOT a natural born citizen.

        IF Mrs. Obama was under 21 when her spawn was born, and in Kenya, then she was a minor and probably not eligible to pass citizenship to her son.

    • The_Inquisitor

      The way to end our welfare check for the rest of the world is to end welfare.

    • bigbang

      The situation with Obama and McCain is completely different. Obama's mother may have been an American but if he wasn't born on American soil than he is not a "natural born citizen." McCain on the other hand was born on a navy base in Panama which is the same as being born in any of the states. Any American Embassy, Air Force, Army and Navy base are considered American soil and a person born there is considered to be a "natural born citizen."

      • heidiannej

        actually, if you are born to dual citizenship (as obama was, even IF he was born in hawaii) and you have not renounced all ties to your second country of citizenship by the time you are an adult, then you are NOT a natural born citizen, but rather just a citizen. additionally, there is some indication that obama was adopted by his step-father mr. soetoro (sp?) and if that is the case, his u.s. citizenship was renounced by his mother as indonesia did not, at that time, permit dual citizenship.

        i am more concerned that he release his school records from the colleges to prove that he was registered as a u.s. citizen. and that he present proof that he renounced his british citizenship (authorities in the u.k. say they have no record of that occuring).

    • john1958

      John McCain does not apply to your response. Both of his parents were American Citizens. In fact his father was a Navy Admiral and he was born on an American Military installation. As for Obama he was born in Kenya with his birth "registered" in Hawaii. His mother surrendered her American Citizenship.

      • Tom

        Don't forget that when McCain was born, the Panama Canal Zone was United States Territory, thus McCain WAS born a natural born citizen.

    • Mark

      I forgot the exact details but at the time of Obamas birth the mother had to be in the US for a specific period of time for Obama to be considered Natve Born. I did the math before with the law and found the it is true if he was born outside the USA, the mother didn't not meet the requirements to have Obama automatically nativised. I wish I could find the details, it was an interesting debate when I first encountered it.

      But Hawaii has produced a birth certificate. And Obama to me seems to be a native citizen. Just because Hawaii went digital with the certificates, the birthers are all having fits.

      • davarino

        Hawaii did not produce a birth certificate, they produced a certificate of live birth which is not a birth certificate, and that is a forgery. They have no proof that he is a natural born citizen. Thanks for continuing the lie, check your facts dude.

      • Cuban Refugee

        Mark, I refer you to this excellent site:

        "The Founders were very clear that the Commander-in-Chief should be a "natural born" citizen. They were less clear in their definition of what that meant. But they sure as hell didn't mean a natural born citizen of Kenya. At birth, Barack Obama was a Kenyan citizen and British subject whose citizenship status was governed by The British Nationality Act of 1948."

    • ECBC

      I am in such a situation…I am an american citizen born and raised I have 4 children born there I was married there but because I and my Irish husband are living in Ireland at this time I have to PROVE to them that I am a citizen and pay several hunds of dollars to get my youngest recogonized as citizen which is his birth right. they do it illegally and I have to suffer. My husband and I have been in Ireland for 4 yrs waiting on his Visas to become a permanent resident. My 3 older children from my 1st marriage are living w/ their grandmother because I was forced out of my country because they would not let him stay while they processed his paperwork(we started w/bush and look what I have to deal with now) This all sickens me

    • Azcat85

      McCain was born on a US MIlitary Base, considered US Territory. GET OVER IT! Obama has yet to allow access to any of the actual documents that would remove all this doubt. If there is nothing to hide, then stop the secrecy act. Trust but verify. The verification has been nullified by a culpable media.

    • Alexander Gofen

      “Natural born citizen” is a subset of “Ordinary citizens”

      Natural born = Born to both parents Americans on American soil

      Ordinary citizenship – regulates by §1401 of the US Code.
      §1401(a): born on American soil – to a legally staying alien.
      Must not be applied to those born to an illegally staying mother!

    • Mike Smith, M.A.

      To clarify:
      SECTION 240-245

      240. The people, as a political body, consist of:
      (a) Citizens who are electors.
      (b) Citizens not electors.

      241. The citizens of the State are:
      (a) All persons born in the State and residing within it, except
      the children of transient aliens and of alien public ministers and
      (b) All persons born out of the State who are citizens of the
      United States and residing within the State.

      Mike Smith, M.A.
      Kelly's Cove
      San Francisco

    • Ali

      Not quite right. In order to pass on American citizenship, that citizen parent has to have lived in the US for a certain period of time before a certain age, depending on the law in force at the time of his birth.

  • DogWithoutSlippers

    Anchors away!~

    • Kanwi

      You could also call them "fish hook" babies, on a line of anothe allegiance for as long as it suits, swimming the soup trough of the USA until they are pulled one way or another on call. Talk about an 'each way' bet!!!

  • DogWithoutSlippers

    or is it Anchors aweigh?

    • trickyblain

      this one

  • aspacia

    Good pun dog

  • aspacia

    Hum, also a good book I read awhile ago.

  • Anthony Marra

    What difference does it make what the Constitution says? We are in the era of the "living" Constitution that under this adminsitration could better be called the "dead" Constitution. Obama dislikes the Constitution because it is "too negative". Unfortunately, Clueless One (the Consitutional Scholar), missed the class that explained why it is negative – to prevent tyrants like him from undoing the the very essence of this country that has made it unique and great.

    • Sad & Scared

      I like the term "dead zone constitution" myself. We as a Country are being stepped on, crap thrown in our face, and taken over inch by inch. Yet we still turn a blind eye to the problems in our America. WATCH OUT TRUE AMERICANS & LEGAL ALIENS, WE ARE ON THE VERGE OF LOSING OUR COUNTRY.

      • Nina

        It feels that way. Things are decided, and we aren't asked if we agree.

  • Walt

    It should be up to the parents if they take the kid with them when they are deported.

    • beth

      it is the parents responsibility to care for and protect their child. We are a country NOT a daycare facility. They knew what they were doing when they broke the law by entering illegally as well as STEALING social security numbers. They knew the consequences for their family and are playing on the heart strings of the liberals.

    • doc

      Take the illigal BRATS with them

    • Rachel

      My thoughts exactly! The baby may very well be a ctizen but the parents are not. They can choose to leave the baby here to become ward of the state or take it with them when they are deported back!

  • Donla

    Actually Pelosi's rare brush with morality was when she co-opted God to justify whatever evil she supports. Someone needs to politely remind her that it's been done professionally before when that Satan fellow quoted God's scripture to God in the desert. I suspect nancy would never be so bold – would she? (Naw, she just hates to get any sand in her Birkenstocks)

  • Cuban Refugee

    No, the Framers of the Constitution did not intend to have anchor babies become citizens filling our overcrowded schools courtesy of our tax dollars. In their wisdom, they also made very clear their desire in the law that only "natural born citizens" would be eligible to be elected President of the United States. Every last one of those signers is now turning over in their graves as they observe the abomination currently occurring in their precious experiment in freedom. With a Kenyan Islamofascist Marxist, surrounded by other radicals, at the helm of their Perfect Union, all of the Founders, and the blood, sweat and tears lost in their selfless exercise in patriotism, are being mocked and minimized by the diabolical forces who will become our slave masters in the New World Order.

    • Nina

      Can't you disagree without calling your opponent names?

      • Grayzel

        Just what names did Cuban Refugee call his opponents? I would also like to know who his opponent is?

        • Cuban Refugee

          Grayzel: That would be who his opponents "are."

        • trickyblain

          I don't know, but most likely a ny reasonable American citizen probably would not take kindly to beinng called a "Kenyan Islamofascist Marxist." Especially if a Cuban boatperson was the one doing the namecalling.

      • Cuban Refugee

        Nina, dear: I believe you are lost. You were on your way to The Huffington Post, and stumbled upon Front Page. Oh, wait, if you were on your way to HuffPo, you must be aware of the ad hominem attacks they use liberally — what you would label "calling your opponent names." No, my use of "Kenyan Islamofascist Marxist" was only telling the truth, and would be considered mild in contrast to their detritus. Why don't you go there, Nina, so you can see for yourself?

    • rmpdx

      Silly. You embarrass yourself. Obama is neither an Islamofascist (whatever the heck you think that means) nor is he Marxist. Look up both those terms in something a little more scholarly than Rush or Beck (both nothing more than uneducated entertainers trying to turn a buck). Obama's policies and practices show he is a moderate capitalist who believes in state intervention to protect private profit and promote social welfare. That is a far, far cry from the pointless name calling in which you indulge that merely weakens your credibility as to any other serious criticisms you may have.

      • Grayzel

        Was Marx in the labor unions and movement of his time? Still don't understand do you?

      • Cuban Refugee

        rmpdx, I had to restrain myself, or I would have called you a blithering idiot. Ooops! I believe I already did …

        • trickyblain

          Can you further embarass yourself and tell us why two (both authentic printed version and microfiched – that means unaltered) Honolulu dailies printed his birth announcement — one listing his father's street address in Hawaii?

          Kenyan Islamofascist Marxist. LOL. I have to use that one next time I am laughing at Glen Beck fans with friends.

        • rmpdx

          I try not to label people (unlike you) and understand each on their own terms. However, since you labelled yourself as a Cuban refugee, then may I suggest that you stop living in the past and filtering the entire world through your anti-Communist lens. Just because you don't like something doesn't make it Marxist. I'm not a big Obama fan myself, but I don't think it contributes anything positive to the country that graciously allowed you refuge to engage in negative and irrational name-calling. Do something good for the country you now call home or go back to your original home and make a difference there.

  • The_Inquisitor

    Don't argue the 14th Amendment. Nullify it; it isn't the law of the land. The 14th Amendment was neither constitutionally presented to congress nor was it constitutionally ratified by the states according to Gutzman in The Politically Incorrect Guide to the Constitution.

    Declare the 14th Amendment unconstitutional and return political power back to the states and hence back to the people of America.

    • iyzablue


    • Azcat85

      I believe that you are mistaken. The fourteenth amendment was drafted, sent to the states, and ratified after being approved by a Congressional super majority following the overturn of President Johnson's veto of the Civil Rights Act of 1866. Three-fourths of the states (28 of 37) ratified the amendment in Dec 1868 and by 2003 all of the original 37 states ratified it.

      • The_Inquisitor

        The key word is "constitutionally." Elections and ratifications are supposed to be free. There was coercion north and south in pushing the ratification of the amendment.

        The Confederate States were under martial law, unconstitutional in time of peace. The South had surrendered; the shooting had stopped. The Confederate States had to ratify the 14th Amendment in order to reenter the Union. Reenter the Union! The rational for the war had been that they never left the Union.

        This is a real can of worms. Any competent lawyer could get the 14th Amendment nullified on the above grounds if we were still a nation of laws.

        Let me make a correction to my original post. I should have written: The 14th Amendment was neither constitutionally PRESENTED TO THE STATES by congress …

  • sflbib

    Re: Comments by Senator Jacob Howard of Michigan and Senate Judiciary Committee chairman, Lyman Trumbull of Illinois

    Hubert Humphrey who was pushing the Civil Rights Act said, "I'll eat my hat if this thing turns out into quotas."

    You can never know what you are letting loose when you pass a new law.

  • MBA NJ

    In the jungle they would be whipped and killed for breaking into our house and pretending to be the house owner. We wouldn't be sitting around talking about it. Agenda 21 probably cannot be accomplished without such massive deceptions that will be used in the future to weaken ALL THE OTHER PROTECTIONS created by our founding fathers…."well, that rule was broken, so let's ignore this one…" Say goodbye to freedoms….

  • beth

    has anyone stopped to consider the impact stealing someones social security number has one the individuals and family that the crime has been comitted against? Where is the sympathy and justice for those who are VICTIMS of identity THEFT? There is no justice or help for them…they just have to deal with the CONSEQUENCES. Consequences are exactly what these illegal parents should have to deal with. Their choices not only impact them but their children. Sorry but send them back and have them apply for citizenship. Citizenship in the US should not be a birth right. Protect those who obey the law and immigrants who abide by our immigration laws not those who cheat the system.

  • Clay Cole

    The framers did not intend for people born of forginers to be citizens. That is why we had to pass the XIV Ammendment to protect blacks born of slaves. That time has past. The XIV Ammendment should be repealed. People should not be able to benifit from breaking the as when people use anchor babies so they will not be deported.

  • Guest

    GOP Sucks- You're missing a VERY IMPORTANT aspect of citizenship for individuals .vs. for president. The NATURAL BORN CLAUSE for presidents MUST have TWO parents as citizens of the US! Therefore Obama's father NOT being a citizen of US makes him ineligilble to be president. Look up Jus Solis and Jus Sanguines maybe you will learn something.

    • ECBC

      guest…you are wrong I am an american citizen and my husband is not we live in ireland therefore my sons are both natural born you dumb ass pull your head out

      • ECBC

        Trust me I had to pay the goverment to getmy youngest recongonized

      • Guest

        Maybe instead of being in Ireland you should read the law dumb ass! Oh and by the way I am an attorney! Your sons take your citizenship. Again the unitelligent confuse the definition for citizenship and presidential citizenship as one in the same it is NOT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Educate yourself with Vattel's Natural Law!
        There is native born, naturalized and natural born

      • Guest

        When President Obama was born in 1961, under the British Nationality Act 1948, both his father and he were British subjects/citizens. In 1963, they both became Kenyan citizens. In fact, Mr. Obama’s father was never even a legal resident or immigrant of America. Hence, regardless of where Mr. Obama was born or that he may be a United States citizen under the 14th Amendment, he is not an Article II “natural born Citizen” and not eligible to be President. This ineligibility has absolutely nothing to do with his race or class but all to do with his being born with multiple citizenships and allegiances and not satisfying the strict eligibility requirements of Article II. If someone believes that today the “natural born Citizen” clause no longer serves any useful purpose, then the proper way to change or abandon it is by way of constitutional amendment under Article V of the Constitution, not by usurpation.

    • ECBC

      there is nothing that says you have to have BOTH parents…again pull your head out. If you have never gone through the process you have no damn Idea of what you are talking about.

      • Guest

        Maybe you should learn the laws instead of wasting your time here posting garbage you're not educated enough to speak about!
        There are two different ways in which a natural born citizen can be created. By American law, all people born on American soil are considered natural born citizens. In addition, people who are born overseas to American parents are also classified as natural born citizens.

        People who are born on American soil are said to have the right of jus soli, and this right is protected in the 14th Amendment to the United States constitution, which specifically states that “all persons born in the United States…are citizens of the United States.” Jus soli has become a topic of hot discussion in some areas of the United States, because this right is also extended to children born of foreign parents, whether or not they are in the country legally. In the case of children born to illegal immigrants, some people use the derogatory term “anchor baby” to describe a child who is a natural born citizen, under the mistaken belief that illegal immigrants will not be deported if their children are considered American citizens.

      • Guest

        For children born abroad, the principle which applies is jus sanguinis, or “rule of the blood,” and the rules can get a bit tricky. If a child is born to two parents who are both American citizens, the case is usually clear, and the parents need only apply for a United States passport on the child's behalf to ensure that his or her citizenship is formally recognized. If only one parent is an American citizen, however, jus sanguinis may or may not apply, and the case must be considered before the child is classified as a natural born citizen.

        In situations where only one parent is a United States citizen, he or she must have lived in the United States for at least five years at some point before the child's birth as a full American citizen, and at least two of these five years must have occurred after the parent's 14th birthday. In the case of a child born to an American mother, the child is usually considered a natural born citizen, whether or not the mother is married. However, if an American father is involved in a relationship with a foreign woman and the couple is not married, the father may need to fight for the child's right to citizenship

        • Guest

          According to the U.S. Constitution BOTH parents must be U.S. citizens in order for a U.S. Citizen to qualify to be president. Natural born has a different meaning in the Constitution than in day-to-day matters of immigration. If a person is born in the U.S. of immigrant parents he/she is considered to be a native born citizen and may even be referred to as a natural born citizen but cannot legally hold the office of POTUS unless both parents are also U.S. citizens, regardless that they obtained citizenship through the naturlization process. Read article II of the Constitution. Should the Supreme Court be called upon to interpret what the Founding Fathers' intent was with respect to the phrase "natural born"? Ostensibly, the intent was to ensure that future presidents would owe no allegiance to another country.

          • trickyblain

            Artcle II states that "No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution,"

            It does not define the term as you state, neither do the federalist papers. Where areyou, as a "lawyer!" finding the definition within exsting federal law?

            A number of presidents have had foreign born parents, btw. Not all of them were at the time of ratification.

          • Azcat85

            What presidents had foriegn born parents?

  • jaforush

    All this fuss about breaking up familys………. If my wife and I were to go rob a bank and got caught, arrested could we use the same pretext befor the judge? But sir I know we were breaking the law but your going to send us away what about my children you can't break up our family just because we broke the law…..

    Get out stay out

    • davarino

      Great arguement Jaforush.

      Can anyone trump that?

    • Arizona Spirit

      What about the people who serve our country, when the parents go over sea to fight that splits up families also. Sometimes both parents go. You never hear about them. God Bless our service people.
      Great post.

  • Dave

    No way. The problem did not exist when the bill was written. No one could have forseen illegal immigrants entering the country with the express reason to have a child here to make it legal. You don't reward a crime by giving up our proudest possession. Our citizenship. It must be earned and cherished. Not down sneakily in the dark with the intent to steal or show disrespect. So the deal is you're in your ninth month of pregnancy. You sneak across the border, violating the countries laws. You go to a hospital without medical coverage and force citizens of that country to pay for your pregnancy. Then, because you were able to sneak in undetected that makes the baby born out of an illegal act, LEGAL IN THIS COUNTRY. And you want to know if we all think that's what the 14th Amendment means. COME ON! HOW COULD IT. A little common sense thrown into the mix shoots the whole thing out fo the water. Sometimes you have to use a little common sense and stop being so damned "Politically Correct". If someone violates you, you don't reward them.

  • Dave

    To show how hypocrytical this all is. A few months ago a diplomat from another country came to the U.S. with his wife on a diplomatic mission. The wife was pregnant and went into labor while touring the U.S. She delivered her child in one of our hospitals. IS THE CHILD A LEGAL U.S. CITIZEN? No. The birth certificate shows the country of the parents origin as the child's nationality. So I guess it's a selective birth right option that exists. It's a joke. You're a citizen if you're born of citizens. Not because of any crime your parents committed to sneak you to be born here. Discussion ended.

  • Les

    reading these comments, i am amazed that the present government and president were even elected…..i thought the American people had more common sense than to get roped in by these left wing excuses for a better America………..the immigration rules are clear, very clear. I had to go through the legal process to become a legal resident and then on to American citizenship….i cannot blame anyone for wanting to come into this country for a better life, I did. But i say do it the legal way….pay your dues for process….contribute to the country you have adopted and live the life you want in a free country……..this country was built on immigrants it still depends on immigrants to continue……….we need security with immigration not uncontrolled mayhem.

    • MoonliteSonata

      Congratulations, Les! We are proud and happy to count you as a fellow citizen!

    • clif

      they duped the young & the ignorant. Our universities are not teaching history any more, they're teaching political correctness!

  • JohnAdamSon

    Read a post the other day pointing out it's not just the Hispanics who are growing in numbers b/c of anchor babies, but Muslims are using the same path to live in US and grow their own state within a state. These growing numbers of people in this country are not willing to assimilate and accept American culture, our way of life, values, and belief system. It has become clear they have been allowed to abuse our immigration system, by a gov't too long ignoring enforcing immigration laws, leading to two very different cultures competing on US soil for who will outnumber who the fastest! Both have grown in population to the point they have not only D.C. but state gov'ts catering to their special interests and allowing them to dictate and shape US policy that will benefit their state within a state. This all further dilutes American sovereignty and our ability to remain in tact as the nation our Founding Fathers intended. For too long TRUE American citizens have been tolerant of the INTOLERANT LEFTIES…..and look where that has taken us…..

    • Nina

      This is so true. Suddenly one sees many more Muslims in the streets and in our schools. And as they have many more children than Americans, your guess is as good as mine. They are already quite vocal about their "rights", and politicians start pandering to them just as they do to the other "immigrants." What will be the end? It's scary.

  • brimp

    The original Constitution recognizes 'Citizens of the United States'. The Supreme Court of the United States have stated many times that these Citizens have unalienable rights. The 14th Amendment created a second class of citizen called a 'citizen of the United States'. The Supreme Court (in the Slaughter House cases) recognize that this, second class of citizen, have been granted rights from Congress (civil rights). The second class of citizen is like a corporation in that it does not have any unalienable rights. The 'born or naturalized' text has been used to support abortion – since a fetus has not been born yet, it does not have any civil rights. The fraud that has perpetrated against us is to get us to accept second class citizenship status. Congress could pass a law giving US citizenship (second class) to the children of aliens but they have not done this yet. I am an American national, a citizen of my state, a Citizen of United States, and I am not a citizen of the United States AKA U.S. citizen.

  • ticked off

    i dont particularly care weather or not everyone wants to argue over legal or not statis on the children if the parents are breaking the laws of the country being here then even if the children are born here shouldnt even come in to question to legal or not they are criminals and as such shouldnt even poze the question of legality

  • Bandit35

    "At least one parent of any children born in this country has to be: a native born citizen, a naturalized citizen, or a legally admitted residential alien in order for the children to be considered a legal citizen."

    Out of 191 countries in the U.N. the above law pertains to citizenship in all of it's member nations except 1. Guess which one that is?

  • Jenifer Gray

    If the rules changed for minors that are recipients of social assistance of all kinds to the parent must be a United States Citizen. There should be a time limit on these benefits as well unless the recipient is an elderly United States Citizen.

  • MONA






  • Ron Day

    Amnesty will be granted soon. All haters will be ignored.

    • USMCSniper

      And after the 12,000,000 get amnesty, the number will become 40,000,000 as the borders hemmorage with illegals seeking amnesty and a free ride.

  • Lucy Robles

    MONA · 12 minutes ago



    Perhaps blacks feel the pain of what white supremacy have done to their ancestors and family.
    Besides that and in case you haven't noticed about 30% of Hispanics are black.

  • Eskimo Assassin

    The 14th Amendment was Congress' direct response to the Supreme's decision in Dredd Scott (1857), which found that Blacks — even free blacks — were not citizens who could bring suit in U.S. District Court. Thus, even after passage of the 13th Amendment, which abolished slavery, Blacks had no access to the federal court systen because the District Courts were still bound by the decision in Scott.

  • J_P

    "If you're born outside of the United States with having at least one American parent you are automatically an American citizen ( this is why the birthers are pathetic to take the benefit of the doubt away from Obama's qualification while McCain fits this criteria as well)."

    THIS IS NOT TRUE. I don't know all the facts with Obama's birth, and probably never will. But with McCain, he was born on a US military installation (which is considered sovereign US soil). He was also born to 2 American parents. Which is why he is American. An child born abroad to American parents is NOT considered a citizen of that country, but many countries allow that child to come back after their 18th birthday and claim citizenship if they choose to…which is what we should do! But we need to cut off the people coming here to have their babies so the taxpayers can pay for that child and the parents don't have to worry about it. That is just wrong. Let us focus on our own problems for a while and not adopt someone elses.

  • Eric

    Another illuminating, fact-filled essay that rebuts the fashionable gibberish in most of the mainstream media and elite policy debates.

    Thank you for explaining your position, the history of judicial decisions and legislation. and your efforts to restore law and order on the border. It's essential that we maintain the simple principle that words should have meaning, and laws should be understood in their intended context.

    As a strong support of LEGAL immigration to bring in trained specialists (engineers, nurses, doctors) that our nation needs, I'm utterly disgusted at the deception deployed by open borders advocates to erase the distinction between legal and illegal immigrants. Laws matter. Definitions matter.

    Why can't we have an honest, detailed, and meaningful public debate over illegal immigration and the need to restore law and borders?

  • KickEmAll

    As someone that is in law enforcement and has to deal with ID Theft on a daily basis I have to say that the people that are victims of this crime suffer a great deal. Having some illegal punk using your SSN can take you years to get yourself straight with creditors, the IRS, and the social security admin. These damn illegals work using this number and have the least amount of taxes or no taxes taken out of their check which then reflects back on the victims tax returns and in a few years they get a nasty letter from the IRS that they are being audited and they owe thousands in back taxes.

    • Abbetira

      Absolutely……….I have had a couple of friends that have gone through this. They are still fighting with the IRS to get the back taxes they paid for these people and are paying their own taxes in the mean time. This has been a four year process for one of my friends. The real kicker is that I have a friend that is an immigration attorney that says that the e-verify system isn't working because these falsified documents look so real that even she can't tell the difference. Most employers don't check out the documents if they go through the e-verify system even if they suspect they are illegal because it's too expensive.

  • Guest

    It was never envisioned by the founding forefathers that the 14th Ammendment would be prostituted by Illegals. As such citizenship should not be bestowed to children of Illegals born in US soil. Close the loophole retroactively if need be.

  • Alexander Gofen

    “Natural born citizen” is a subset of “Ordinary citizens”

    Natural born = Born to both parents Americans on American soil

    Ordinary citizenship – regulates by §1401 of the US Code.
    §1401(a): born on American soil – to a legally staying alien.
    Must not be applied to those born to an illegally staying mother!

  • Watcher

    That Ammendment to our Constitution was intended to protect the children of freed slaves.
    We no longer have freed slaves giving birth in America and thus we no longer have any need for that law.
    Our Constitution should be amended to remove it.

    And all States should follow the example set by Arizona since our Federal Government is derelict in it's duty to protect the States from invasion.

  • Abbetira

    I am in full agreement with most that has been said here, but what people fail to realize is this is not an issue that just began with the Obama administration. I have an inside source that is retired military law enforcement that was asigned to a task force in 1982 (The Regan Years) that was assigned to dismantle the surveilance equipment and national guard at the boarder. Our boarder has not been secure since 1982. It is not just the lefties that have incentive to allow illegals in. That is why neither party will take a stand on this issue. Republicans want cheap labor, and the democrats need the blue collar vote. The whole system is broken and we need to work together on solutions instead of focusing on the problems………..we know what the problems are. Let's quit pointing the finger at left or right………….Let's unite and take back our country!!!

  • jimbo

    GOP: fuck empathy

  • GOP_Sucks

    You birthers don't know the law — I have a daughter who was born in China. I'm a naturalized American and her Mother is Chinese. As soon as I had her birth certificate in my hand, I went to the American consulate in Guangzhou and got her passport immediatly!! Her older brother, born from the same Mother, was born in Los Angeles but he has spent the majority of his life in China with his Mother while I travel all over the world working, supporting the both of them while paying U.S. income tax. The both of them would be subjected to qualification for President not because of where they were born, or if one or both of their parents are naturalized parents but rather their time spent in the U.S as being assimulated into American democracy.
    You missed the "INTENT" of the constitution in probably every admendment including the Bill of Rights. In the Context of the times, they simply didn't want one of King George's kids claiming an American throne for Briton by being elected President of the United States. Ahhh but that didn't stop George's little swine from the lone star state from getting elected thus us all getting in the shorts in the long run right?

    • GOP_Sucks

      Let's say that hypothetically Texas declared itself independent during George and Barbara's point of conception— just for the sake of arguement for you pro lifers okay? (aghhhhh what an awefull image!!!) and it was right after George ditched his plane in the sea at sea, that would make G.W unqualified.
      But yet all you jack-off birthers know he is qualified based on his inate background as an assimulated American and how his family have been a significant contributer to our society.

      The only reason why you question the Hawaiian is not because of some twisted interpretation but rather because you would deny people their right to vote because you simply don't like their choice. If it was the other way around, you would be defending your choice for President. That makes you bad Americans which all fanatics, left or right ,are.

  • Henriette Paup

    Thanks for the information on that. I wrote it off as merely another expense, but I am going to examine it all over again.

  • trickyblain

    Research? Really, Cuban Refugee?

    Thanks for another chuckle. What is it about that site you like best – the fourth grade level writing? The lack of coherent organization? The shoddy design and cartoonish images?

    You do know that anyone with a computer can create a Web site and put whatever nonsense he wants on it, right?

    Alas, even the dude who runs that abortion won't try to touch the fact that two papers ran birth announcements in 1961.

    Care to try again? How did those announcements get there, in '61, if he was actually born halfway across the globe?

  • Cuban Refugee

    Acquiring a "certificate of live birth" from the State of Hawaii, even if the baby was born elsewhere, was a very common occurrence at the time of Obama's birth; the city of Honolulu would automatically place a birth announcement in the paper as a courtesy to the family.

    OK — if you do not like cartoonish images, try this:

    Obama’s Vast Network of Radicals, Leftists, and Communists
    Jun 24, 2010 07:07 am | Discover The Networks

    Discover The Networks shows, in painstaking detail, Barack Obama’s close connections to a stunning array of anti-American, anti-capitalist radicals who, like the President himself, seek to transform the United States into a society bearing no resemblance whatsoever to the founders’ vision.

  • trickyblain

    And they would list his father's address as Honolulu? Why?

  • trickyblain

    Oh, and Obama.