Macbeth
Banned
+2,444|5871

Buoyed by recent public opinion polls suggesting they're on the right track with illegal immigration, Arizona Republicans will likely introduce legislation this fall that would deny birth certificates to children born in Arizona — and thus American citizens according to the U.S. Constitution — to parents who are not legal U.S. citizens. The law largely is the brainchild of state Sen. Russell Pearce, a Republican whose suburban district, Mesa, is considered the conservative bastion of the Phoenix political scene. He is a leading architect of the Arizona law that sparked outrage throughout the country: Senate Bill 1070, which allows law enforcement officers to ask about someone's immigration status during a traffic stop, detainment or arrest if reasonable suspicion exists — things like poor English skills, acting nervous or avoiding eye contact during a traffic stop.

But the likely new bill is for the kids. While SB 1070 essentially requires of-age migrants to have the proper citizenship paperwork, the potential "anchor baby" bill blocks the next generation from ever being able to obtain it. The idea is to make the citizenship process so difficult that illegal immigrants pull up the "anchor" and leave.

But that was 1868. Today, Pearce says the 14th Amendment has been "hijacked" by illegal immigrants. "They use it as a wedge," Pearce says. "This is an orchestrated effort by them to come here and have children to gain access to the great welfare state we've created." Pearce says he is aware of the constitutional issues involved with the bill and vows to introduce it nevertheless. "We will write it right." He and other Republicans in the red state Arizona point to popular sympathy: 58% of Americans polled by Rasmussen think illegal immigrants whose children are born here should not receive citizenship; support for that stance is 76% among Republicans.
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article … z0qnNM2r00
I wonder how this is going to play out. Sounds like a good idea and would work on cutting down on illegal immigration but I don't see how they can possibly make it function in a way that wouldn't get it taken down in the SCOTUS.

On a sidenote: I voted for Obama and am not one of those anti-anything obama types despite the fact I don't agree with a lot of his initiatives so far but I do think that rather than have gone for health care reform and handing out a bunch of new entitlements he should have moved forward with immigration reform first. Since GOP-Dem/Obama relations don't look so good after the health care mess and the 2010 elections will give some if not most of the Congress back to the GOP, I don't see any sort of immigration reform happening, at least none that wouldn't totally piss off Mexicans and shit thus damning me from having to hear more crap on news websites and television about the ''plight'' of the Mexicans.

Sorry for spelling or any other sort of mistakes. I'm not 100% here.
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5643|London, England
This is a direct violation of the Constitution so... No.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
Spark
liquid fluoride thorium reactor
+874|6960|Canberra, AUS

JohnG@lt wrote:

This is a direct violation of the Constitution so... No.
Well, so much for that.
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
Harmor
Error_Name_Not_Found
+605|6834|San Diego, CA, USA
I was always under the impression that we would need to pass an Amendment to the Constitution to NOT give citizenship to someone born in the United States.

The way it works now is the baby is a citizen, but the parents aren't, but can apply threw all these programs to stay in the states.

What I would like is an Amendment that would at least one parent be legal before you become a citizen by birth.

This will be taken by the Supreme Court and Arizona will probably loose.
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5643|London, England

Harmor wrote:

I was always under the impression that we would need to pass an Amendment to the Constitution to NOT give citizenship to someone born in the United States.

The way it works now is the baby is a citizen, but the parents aren't, but can apply threw all these programs to stay in the states.

What I would like is an Amendment that would at least one parent be legal before you become a citizen by birth.

This will be taken by the Supreme Court and Arizona will probably loose.
There's no 'probably' about it They WILL lose in a 9-0 decision.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,816|6391|eXtreme to the maX
But children of criminals are more likely to be criminals.
Better liquidate them.
Fuck Israel
Harmor
Error_Name_Not_Found
+605|6834|San Diego, CA, USA
Well if the law was enforced both parents should deported...and they would take their American Citizen child with them.
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6690|North Carolina
Jus sanguinis makes more sense than jus soli.  Just because you're born on our soil shouldn't mean you are automatically a citizen if your parents snuck in for that exact purpose.

Jus sanguinis is more relevant and less exploitable.

We just need to amend the Constitution to reflect this.

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard