DACA and the federal shutdown

Dec 2013
33,811
19,359
Beware of watermelons
#21
Must be wonderful being YOU! If no one will talk to you, you can just talk to yourself.....and you SEEM happier that way.

Atta boy!
At least that way I'm getting an interesting response. I cannot even get a clear one from you, much less an intelligent and interesting one. B) Then again what should i expect from a school teacher. Maybe we. Should start a thread about finger painting and how it is a product of the patriarchy designed to keep tools out of the hands of female and minority children. Maybe that would be in your wheelhouse B)
 
Likes: 3 people
Jan 2017
3,515
713
Michigan
#24
So you disagree with your constitution?
I suppose you are talking about the 14th amendment

https://www.usnews.com/opinion/arti...-doesnt-make-illegal-aliens-children-citizens

and from that



What about those who are born here?

After the Civil War, the 14th Amendment (overturning, in part, Dred Scott v. Sandford, which said that no black could be a U.S. citizen) clarified the conditions of citizenship: "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the States wherein they reside."
ADVERTISING

Many today assume the second half of the citizenship clause ("subject to the jurisdiction thereof") merely refers to the day-to-day laws to which we are all subject. But the original understanding referred to political allegiance. Being subject to U.S. jurisdiction meant, as then-Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee Lyman Trumbull stated, "not owing allegiance to anybody else [but] subject to the complete jurisdiction of the United States." The author of the provision, Sen. Jacob Merritt Howard of Michigan, pointed out that the jurisdiction language "will not, of course, include foreigners."

[Read more about U.S. immigration reform.]

It was in 1898 (in United States v. Wong Kim Ark) that the Supreme Court expanded the constitutional mandate, holding that the children of legal, permanent residents were automatically citizens. While the decision could be (and is often) read more broadly, the court has never held that the clause confers automatic citizenship on the children of temporary visitors, much less of illegal residents.
 
Likes: 1 person
Apr 2013
38,049
26,061
La La Land North
#25
I suppose you are talking about the 14th amendment

https://www.usnews.com/opinion/arti...-doesnt-make-illegal-aliens-children-citizens

and from that



What about those who are born here?

After the Civil War, the 14th Amendment (overturning, in part, Dred Scott v. Sandford, which said that no black could be a U.S. citizen) clarified the conditions of citizenship: "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the States wherein they reside."
ADVERTISING

Many today assume the second half of the citizenship clause ("subject to the jurisdiction thereof") merely refers to the day-to-day laws to which we are all subject. But the original understanding referred to political allegiance. Being subject to U.S. jurisdiction meant, as then-Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee Lyman Trumbull stated, "not owing allegiance to anybody else [but] subject to the complete jurisdiction of the United States." The author of the provision, Sen. Jacob Merritt Howard of Michigan, pointed out that the jurisdiction language "will not, of course, include foreigners."

[Read more about U.S. immigration reform.]

It was in 1898 (in United States v. Wong Kim Ark) that the Supreme Court expanded the constitutional mandate, holding that the children of legal, permanent residents were automatically citizens. While the decision could be (and is often) read more broadly, the court has never held that the clause confers automatic citizenship on the children of temporary visitors, much less of illegal residents.
And yet all these years later it still holds as law. Perhaps your post lists opinions of people who don't matter.
 
Sep 2017
228
37
In a House
#26
This bears repeating:

Birth Certificates do not state US Birth Certificate on it. Birth Certificates are not proof of US Citizenship, neither are SS numbers, the Department of State may use them as evidence in issuing a US Passport. A birth certificate can be denied if the parent doesn't have the correct ID in order to obtain their child's BC from the local county office. Not only that but if they were born via a mid wife they can even be denied US Passports (which is actually the only proof you will ever have that you are indeed a US National/US Citizen).

https://www.law.com/texaslawyer/almI...20180016012721

https://www.aclu.org/blog/mass-incar...zens-passports

What if we say that children born to illegals can be US Nationals, but not US Citizens, they could be categorized like those from American Somoa or the Swains Islands (outlying US possessions)?

The only US documents that say children born to illegals are born US Citizens is the Foreign Affairs Manuel, section 1111(d)
https://fam.state.gov/fam/07fam/07fam1110.html

The Wong Kim Ark case never touches on birth to illegals, and Justice Gray says the 14th Citizenship clause is merely declaratory of existing law, that law being the 1866 Civil Rights Act.
 
Dec 2012
19,842
8,383
California
#27
No, we're not.
The topic was what racists call "chain migration".
Aka Family Reunification.

It's when a US citizen can get preference to obtain a visa for their relatives.

It was added to immigration code to keep America White, or at least overwhelmingly European.
But Europeans lose contact with their families when they emigrate.
Asians stay in contact, there are Chinese families continueing to correspond with relatives in China after three or four generations in the US.
So Family Reunification brings in a lot of Asians, and a lot of Hispanics, as Hispanic is the fastest growing segment of the citizenry.
Why the hell should they have preference?! The choice to leave their family is theirs, NOT ours!!
 
Likes: 1 person

Similar Discussions