Sen. David Vitter (R-LA) is set to introduce legislation to end so-called “birthright” citizenship. “Birthright” citizenship means anyone born on the soil of the United States is automatically granted U.S. citizenship.
Current citizenship laws stem from the wording of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution which 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.”
Among developed nations, only the U.S. and Canada still offer automatic citizenship to children born on their soil. Not a single European country follows the practice. We take this right for granted, but the evidence is that this entitlement encourages a booming birth tourism business (which undermines our immigration objectives) and virtually guarantees that the number of people in the country illegally will continue to grow.
As you may know, ICE agents recently raided 37 sites in California accused of hosting “birth tourism” where wealthy Chinese citizens would give birth in the U.S. so the child would be a citizen and could sponsor the parents and family for immigration later on.
According to a report from John Feere of the Center for Immigration Studies, admitting family members account for most of the nation’s growth in immigration levels. Of the 1,130,818 immigrants who were granted legal permanent residency in 2009, a total of 747,413 (or, 66 percent) were family-sponsored immigrants.
Vitter’s legislation would restrict citizenship to U.S. citizens or permanent resident aliens or those in the military. Right now, the government just hands out citizenship almost at random:
Astonishingly, the government, which Feere describes as being on “automatic pilot” on this issue, even gives passports to children born to foreign diplomats here – clearly people not “subject to the jurisdiction” of the U.S. When he followed up with the Social Security Administration on this question, he was told they knew the practice was inappropriate, but were not sure how to monitor it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oK4fXlhqlLQ
I seen groups of Mexicans at JM Smuckers in middle of a field of small trees
THE COMMUNISTS HAVE DESTROYED A LAW THAT WAS REFLECTIVE OF THE GOOD INTENTIONS OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. ABUSE LEADS TO NO USE. TIME TO CANCEL. EVERYTHING THEY DO IS TO TAKE DOWN THE USA. WHEN THE COMMUNISTS WIN THEY WIN AND WHEN THEY LOSE THEY WIN.
SO I CALLED MY LAUNDRY GUY.
HELLO CHOU THIS IS TOM B27. HE KNOWS ME BY THE CODE HE PUTS ON MY SHIRTS.
OH TOM B27 HOW ARE YOU.
GOOD CHOU. HAVE YOU GOT TIME FOR A FAVOR.?
MO MEN TAI NO PROBLEM YOU LOOKING FOR CLINTON EMAILS?
HOW DID YOU KNOW?
DID BIG NUMBER. ELLY BODY WANT CLINTON EMAIL I HAVE THEM ON TOP OF MY TOP SECLET FILE.
CAN YOU GIVE ME A CERTAIN CATEGORY?
EASY VELLY EASY WHICH SLOT YOU WANT? MILATELLY SECLETS, CHAMPAIGN DONATIONS FROM FOREIGN GOVERNMENTS, ONE
PAGE CHELSEA WEDDING PLAN IN CAPS. .FAKE BLOOD CLOT REPORTS , BENGHAZI COVER UP. SHE HAS NINE COMPUTERS WE CHARGE ONE DOLLAR FOR TEN PAGES. WE ARE MUCH CHEAPER THAN KGB AGENT SNOWDEN OR PLIVATE MANWOMANING. PUTIN HAS MINIMUM COVER CHARGE. AL QUEDA WON’T SELL YOU UNLESS YOU DO BILL CLINTON CONVERSION.
YOU MEAN FROM CHRISTIANITY TO ISLAM?
NO FROM DINARS TO DOLLAR.
YOU CAN ALSO GET HARD COPY FROM THE QUEEN OF ENGLAND AND ANGELA MERKEL.
ELLYBOLLY GOT DIS SHEET.
DIS STORY NOW GO PUBLIC. THEN MUSICAL THE PHANTOM OF THE SERVER. BOY SHE RUINED THAT SNAKE DEPARTMENT.
FBI MUST SEIZE CLINTON’S COMPUTERS NOW
BASED ON THE HACKING OF BLUMENTHAL’S ADVICE TO CLINTON ON THE BENGHAZI COVER UP AND FOR THE PROTECTION OF AMERICAN FORCES AND PEOPLE THOSE COMPUTERS MUST BE SEIZED IMMEDIATELY BEFORE MORE EVIDENCE IS DESTROYED.
THAT INCLUDES PERSONAL WHICH BECAME A MATTER OF PUBLIC RECORD WHEN SHE MERGED THOSE EMAILS WITH GOVERNMENT/ EMAILS
MAKE NO MISTAKE ABOUT IT.FROM HER HACKABLE COMPUTER AL QUEDA LEARNED THE SITUATION AT BENGHAZI.
PUTIN LEARNED THAT NO RESISTANCE WOULD COME FROM SEIZING CRIMEA AND INVADING UKRAINE.
HEZBOLLAH LEARNED THAT OBAMA WAS GIVING UP IRAQ. THEY ALSO LEARNED WE WOULD PULL OUT OF YEMEN.
NOT TO MENTION POSSIBLE BRIBERY ARRANGEMENTS AND PAY OFFS FROM FOREIGN COUNTRIES FOR PARTY FAVORS
DID FIDEL CASTRO KNOW HOW FAR TO GO IN NEGOTIATIONS AND SELLING OUT OF MIAMI CUBAN AMERICANS FOR THE THIRD TIME?
BASED ON THIS ALONE THOSE COMPUTERS (I BELIEVE THERE IS MORE THAN ONE) MUST BE SEIZED BECAUSE THEY POSE A THREAT TO THE POOR SECURITY OF THE NATION.
TOM O’DONNELL
SPIRIT OF AMERICA PARTY
http://www.blogtalkradio.com/spiritofamericapartybook/2015/03/11/obama-went-around-
WE NEED 75 PRO LIFE WOMEN TO REPLACE 75 RINOS WHO VOTED WITH THE COMMUNIST PARTY (DEMOCRATS) TO ALLOW ILLEGAL INVASION AMNESTY.
“…the wording of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution which 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.” Short of a constitutional amendment, this provision cannot be undone by legislation no matter how much Sen. Vitter and others may which and dream. Or is there something about an amendment of the Constitution that makes it less a part of the Constitution? Before you answer, remember that the Bill of Rights includes the first 10 Amendments. Does not give the parents rights, yes, but this is pretty darn clear and specific, starting out with the word “all.”
It should only be granted if the child was born here and is the child of at least 1 legal citizen.
I suggest you do more reading than this about the law in question. Just a hint so you don’t appear foolish.
The law was drawn up to PROTECT the children of slaves that had been freed by Lincoln, it was ratified 7/9/1868, and it can be repealed just as the 18th was, or a new amendment clarifying conditions of citizenship to those born here, ie; one or both parents, legally here and citizens or on path to citizenship. And clue word, “subject to jurisdiction”, illegals DO NOT obey laws or feel they apply to them.
We would not need to change our constitution if the federal government would stop illegals from crossing our borders.
The governments belief we need illegals ( slaves) to boost our economy is braking the slavery laws. Instead of changing laws to cover their law braking As, they need to free their slaves by sending them home, securing our borders and parents of American children go through their home land embassies to get reunited with their children.
Our government should be slapped with a child endangerment suit, for allowing child trafficking and children living here undocumented. We know American children are going hungry, living below the poverty level and on the streets, can you imagine what the shadow children are going threw. Our constitution and bill of rights has worked fine for this country, Our government seems to be the only ones who can not abide by them, do we change the laws of the land or do we enforce them to their fullness?
Libby your right about “Our constitution and bill of rights has worked fine for this country”. That was until the election of Obama. He knows he is breaking the law but continues just the same. And its only getting worse by the day.
For the life of me I cannot understand why citizenship does mean more to some. No welfare should be available to anyone who is not here legally or is not a citizen. time to end birthright citizenship when parents are here again the law to get an anchor baby.
Amazing how many liberals are so undereducated as to see the word ALL, but clearly miss the word AND. And is an inclusive word that joins 2 things together as in born in the United State AND subject to the jurisdiction… Learn your native language before spouting off-the word AND mean both conditions must be true. If both parents are illegally here, then no child born to them on American soil is “subject to the jurisdiction” since the parents are “subjects” of another country. DUH????
Legal immigrants should not be getting welfare either. We have enough of our own poverty without importing more of it. If immigrants can’t make it on their own in America, then they don’t belong here.
We also need to once and for all define exactly what it takes to be considered natural born. Http:// http://www.teapartyorganizers.ning.com
I would say being born here is not in and of itself cause to grant citizen status. My take is a mother who births here who is here legally gives birth to a citizen albeit NOT a natural born citizen. That requires 2 citizen parents.
Get behind mandatory E verify.
I agree. they are suppose to be self supporting! I also don’t think legal residents or anyone given amnesty or their children on down the line should be allowed to vote and it should be a criminal offense! Nor should they be allowed to hold office of any kind and certainly not get our social security!
I am very afraid of what that arrogant ass will do next year …
But it is known what the intent was and it can be undone…it has to be enforced, it does not state that “children of illegal aliens” will become citizens! And, it was the politicians who did this, they took it upon themselves to do this horrendous act that is biting us in the ass…
An amendment to our Constitution is definitely needed because those in America ILLEGALLY have already broken the laws of our nation and therefore are not entitled to anything except a one way ticket back to wherever they came from. All they want are the freebies that the idiot politicians in DC have given them. And many of them curse America and make demands, even though they are here illegally. In America illegally should not give USA birth rights to them. Give them a document that says their child was born in America, but they are not recognized as US citizens. Their citizenship would revert back to their native country and would be stated as such on the document. And then deport them immediately.
why is it that people constantly miss the word AND. It is a connective word that binds 2 or more things together. Born on US soil AND subject to the jurisdiction … both must be true to be a citizen at birth. Since the parents are not “legally domiciled” as in they are illegals, that means the child born here can’t be a citizen. The jurisdiction at birth is that of your parents who are “subjects” of some other government. Your argument of ALL is quite lame. Beside the case of Wong Kim Ark where it was decided by SCOTUS that his birth gave him citizenship because his parents WERE here legally domiciled when he was born.
make it retroactive to 1986! They can be denaturalized or don’t do anything and just do not acknowledge their “birth certificates.” Which ever is easiest!