scrap birthright citizenship

GURPS

INGSOC
PREMO Member
If Trump does turn the matter over to his wobbly Republican colleagues, he must demand they cut a deal: agree to grant the “Dreamers” permanent status in the U.S. in exchange for abolishing birthright citizenship. That single change could forever reduce the allure of sneaking into the U.S.

Our country and Canada are the lone developed nations that still promise citizenship to anyone born on U.S. or Canadian soil. President Trump says the antiquated policy, drawn from the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution, remains “the biggest magnet for illegal immigration” and he is correct. The parents of those Dreamers risked everything to come to the U.S. for jobs and security, but also knowing that any future children would automatically become American citizens.
[clip]

Not only does birthright citizenship encourage illegal immigration, it also promotes a robust birth tourism industry which attracts people from all over the world, and especially from politically volatile countries like China and Russia. Women come to give birth in the U.S. and then return home, having earned their offspring a safety-net passport worth a fortune in free food, health care, education and retirement benefits.

Once those youngsters turn 18 they may bring a spouse into the country and at the age of 21 they may sponsor other relatives including siblings, minor children and parents. Approximately two-thirds of our immigration is family-based; a good portion of it stems from people coming into the U.S. without papers. This makes a mockery of those waiting in line to enter the country legally.


Trump, GOP should keep DACA but scrap birthright citizenship



for Illegals / Immigrants / Visitors - sure

... for Americans I don't think so
 

SamSpade

Well-Known Member
Because, among other things, it *encourages* illegal immigration. Why go through the channels of immigrating legally when there are no consequences to doing it ILLEGALLY?

Sometimes, when you THINK you're doing a good thing, you're hurting people in the long run. Government steps in and helps a fledgling business - its competitors drop out, because who can compete with the government.
Industry in that part of the economy suffers because fewer people are in it - so it languishes.

I recently read about a problem in feeding people in Africa. Obviously, the best solution is to allow the farmers to produce the food - but farmers cannot compete financially when food is being *GIVEN* for free to people to eat.
Hence, no profit and no seed for next season. Result - LESS food.

I think it is a fair trade-off - allow DACA but absolutely END the interpretation of the 14th Amendment to extend birthright citizenship, a concept that almost no modern nation continues to adhere to.
 

GURPS

INGSOC
PREMO Member
I think it is a fair trade-off - allow DACA but absolutely END the interpretation of the 14th Amendment to extend birthright citizenship, a concept that almost no modern nation continues to adhere to.


:yay:
 

Rommey

Well-Known Member
I think it is a fair trade-off - allow DACA but absolutely END the interpretation of the 14th Amendment to extend birthright citizenship, a concept that almost no modern nation continues to adhere to.
Kind of hard to interpret the first line of the 14th Amendment much differently:
"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."
I doubt any law or executive order that limits anchor babies would not stand up to judicial review.
 

SamSpade

Well-Known Member
I can't grasp why birthright citizenship is gleaned from it - but it's clearly understood that children born of foreign diplomats are NOT citizens by birth.
 

vraiblonde

Board Mommy
PREMO Member
Patron
"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."

And I'm okay with that. Their parents, however, are NOT citizens and have to get their asses back where they came from. They can take their baby or leave it, but they cannot stay. Birth citizenship does not extend to every single relative the kid has.

That's the mantra the Left programs their parrots with: "Tearing families apart! *squawk*" No, those parents have every right to take their child back home with them. Of course, if you remind some brainless prog of this fact, they gape at you open-mouthed with blank eyes and a little drool running down their chin.
 

Wishbone

New Member
Hell I'm on-board with ending it for children of American citizens too.

Too many of these worthless ####s have no idea of how valuable their citizenship. Perhaps if they had to test for it, they'd appreciate the benefits of being American and stop the bitching, flag-burning and hateful rhetoric.

Best option... a Heinlein model.
 
Top