What do people think of anchor babies?

[el Gusano]

58% Say No to Citizenship for Children of Illegal Immigrants

Fifty-eight percent (58%) of U.S. voters say a child born to an illegal immigrant in this country should not automatically become a citizen of the United States, according to a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey.

Thirty-three percent (33%) disagree and say if a women enters the United States as an illegal alien and gives birth to a child here, that child should automatically be a U.S. citizen. That’s what the current law allows and many believe it would require a Constitutional Amendment to change the law.

[BlackFox]

I'm a 58%er on this one. Our immigration situation is quite different now than it was in the 1700s. The current law is an incentive to break the law.

[Scarlet&Gray]

I live by the law of the land not the law of popular opinion. Thank gosh the courts do as well. Born on American soil you're American.

[printemps]

There are 2 chances of the 14th Amendment being repealed: slim and none.

Notwithstanding the belief deporting everyone with an ancestor born to a non citizen would make us stronger.

[rstewart]

It's an easy fix, the kid is a citizen. Mommy and Daddy however are not and will be sent back to wherever they came from. Kid is free to stay but mom and dad have gotta go. Problem solved.

[printemps]

Why make the kid "a citizen" if the ORIGINAL INTENT of the 14th Amendment was to insure the children of ex-slaves would be guaranteed U.S. citizenship - and clearly not to facilitate illegal aliens defying U.S. law at taxpayer expense?

It's conceivable that a 5-4 SCOTUS ruling would make that holding.

More than conceivable, really.

[gridbug]

Notwithstanding the belief deporting everyone with an ancestor born to a non citizen would make us stronger.

Stronger? I doubt it. Joe Biden would be president

[JC]

Jun 4, 2010 9:21:19 GMT -5 printemps said:

Why make the kid "a citizen" if the ORIGINAL INTENT of the 14th Amendment was to insure the children of ex-slaves would be guaranteed U.S. citizenship - and clearly not to facilitate illegal aliens defying U.S. law at taxpayer expense?

It's conceivable that a 5-4 SCOTUS ruling would make that holding.

More than conceivable, really.

The Constitution was not written to be interpreted by means of current affairs.

[el Gusano]

No, but that amendment was written to be interpreted as children of free slaves were citizens, not children of any criminal who can sneak across the border just long enough to pop one out.

[Jay]

Jun 4, 2010 9:21:19 GMT -5 printemps said:

Why make the kid "a citizen" if the ORIGINAL INTENT of the 14th Amendment was to insure the children of ex-slaves would be guaranteed U.S. citizenship - and clearly not to facilitate illegal aliens defying U.S. law at taxpayer expense?

It's conceivable that a 5-4 SCOTUS ruling would make that holding.

More than conceivable, really.

If you're born in the U.S., you're a citizen!

And changing that amendment won't have anything to do w/ the Supreme Court.

[gridbug]

If you're born in the U.S., you're a citizen!

Is this true of foreign tourists if they have a baby while on vacation in the US?

As stupid as it is the anchor babies of illegals are born citizens, but the parents should still be deported if they are caught for ANYTHING from a felony to jaywalking. They can take their anchor with them or the child would just have to be an orphan and ward of the State.

[osrb]

Jun 4, 2010 13:26:24 GMT -5 JC said:

Jun 4, 2010 9:21:19 GMT -5 printemps said:

Why make the kid "a citizen" if the ORIGINAL INTENT of the 14th Amendment was to insure the children of ex-slaves would be guaranteed U.S. citizenship - and clearly not to facilitate illegal aliens defying U.S. law at taxpayer expense?

It's conceivable that a 5-4 SCOTUS ruling would make that holding.

More than conceivable, really.

The Constitution was not written to be interpreted by means of current affairs.

Then why do your people keep calling it a living document? The interstate commerce clause has been misused and abused since the 1930's.

[LimitedRecourse]

I don't think babies are heavy enough to make good anchors.

[Tsavodiner]

Jun 3, 2010 13:40:06 GMT -5 BlackFox said:

I'm a 58%er on this one. Our immigration situation is quite different now than it was in the 1700s. The current law is an incentive to break the law.

What a contradiction, both in terms and philosophy, YOU are!

Want to dismantle the Criminal Justice system over what happens to your buddy Tonya Craft;

Want to march on Washington to legalize your precious tribal herb;

but, when it comes to natural-born American Citizens of Latin ancestry---

BBUUURRRRNNNN THE DAMN CONSTITUTION!!!!!!!

S'matter, you afraid they'll move the rubber dick plant from Dalton to Juarez?

[gridbug]

S'matter, you afraid they'll move the rubber dick plant from Dalton to Juarez?

Just don't move it to Stevenson

[BlackFox]

Jun 6, 2010 20:47:01 GMT -5 Tsavodiner said:

What a contradiction, both in terms and philosophy, YOU are!

No, it's just that I actually look at every situation individually. My political ideology is not an all or nothing proposition.

Want to dismantle the Criminal Justice system over what happens to your buddy Tonya Craft;

If that's your interpretation, then you accuse every member of this forum as you are all alone on this subject.

Want to march on Washington to legalize your precious tribal herb;

You accuse me below of wanting to burn the Constitution, but you somehow think prohibiting the use of a plant is the federal governments responsibility? I don't know what to think of you big government types.

but, when it comes to natural-born American Citizens of Latin ancestry---

BBUUURRRRNNNN THE DAMN CONSTITUTION!!!!!!!

The framers wrote into the Constitution the ability to amend. They knew it would be necessary.

[sargonkiadi]

The true answer is: we need a new form of population control, since Cigarette's and Car's aren't doing it fast enough.

[professorx]

Jun 7, 2010 15:32:28 GMT -5 @sargonkiadi said:

The true answer is: we need a new form of population control, since Cigarette's and Car's aren't doing it fast enough.

Kicking out citizens? check!
Wishing the plague on the foreign born? Check!

Checking IDs? Wait, that crosses the line.

[Action!]

I don't think babies are heavy enough to make good anchors.

They are if you encase them in concrete.