Started by Dave, December 13, 2017, 01:10:27 AM
Quote from: Solar on December 13, 2017, 01:23:36 AMWe pounded this one out back when Cruz first announced his candidacy, though I can't remember the particular threads, you could search our forum for something like "Cruz is a legal American" or something to that effect, or wait, and one of the members will pull it up.But, I did a bit of research and found where the law was changed to accommodate WWII vets who had married foreigners and had lost their lives overseas.The law didn't use to allow a single mother from a foreign land to transfer the deceased father's birthright onto his children, so the law was changed, whereby only one parent need be a citizen, thereby assuring his children could remain in the US as full blown citizens.Cruz is a recipient of this law because his mother is an American citizen that just happened to marry a Cuban, regardless of Ted's birthplace.By the way, welcome to the forum.
Quote from: Dave on December 13, 2017, 02:40:15 AMThanks for the tip. I will check it out.also thanks for the welcome
Quote from: Solar on December 13, 2017, 03:44:27 AMFound one of the threads.Prove it!!!Ignorance of Constitutional law is by it's very definition is a tool of the left, their very existence depends on ignorance.I gave you the law that states quite clearly that a person born abroad to an American is afforded the same Rights.U.S. Const. art. II, § 1, cl. 5. All the sources routinely used to interpret the Constitution confirm that the phrase "natural born Citizen" has a specific meaning: namely, someone who was a U.S. citizen at birth with no need to go through a naturalization proceeding at some later time. And Congress has made equally clear from the time of the framing of the Constitution to the current day that, subject to certain residency requirements on the parents, someone born to a U.S. citizen parent generally becomes a U.S. citizen without regard to whether the birth takes place in Canada, the Canal Zone, or the continental United States.2×2. See, e.g., 8 U.S.C. § 1401(g) (2012); Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, Pub. L. No. 82-414, § 303, 66 Stat. 163, 236–37; Act of May 24, 1934, Pub. L. No. 73-250, 48 Stat. 797.http://conservativepoliticalforum.com/political-discussion-and-debate/cruz-seeks-dismissal-of-presidential-eligibility-case/msg292886/#msg292886
Quote from: Dave on December 14, 2017, 01:08:32 PMThanks for the response. I did check several threads including the long one on Ted Cruz. However, none of them addressed birthright citizenship of what is commonly called "anchor babies".
Quote from: Solar on December 14, 2017, 11:02:27 PMYeah, we pounded that one out as well, and came to the conclusion, Congress was ignoring the laws on the books.There is no such thing as anchor baby laws, only precedent where the laws have been totally ignored, allowing illegals to stay if they were born here, something the trump Administration is currently challenging.Yes, there's a reason you can't find the "Anchor Baby" law, it does not exist.
Quote from: Dave on December 15, 2017, 01:34:35 AMIf there is actually no law that establishes the concept, why the assumption by so many? Also, my assumption is that since it is NOT law, then all the "anchor babies" are not legally citizens. This should be clarified post haste especially since some of them are I would imagine, becoming of legal age. It would cause them serious problems to correct this error in their status. Typical do-noting Congress. To me this is so easy and simple, yet they will make it a long drawn out and complicated.
Quote from: Individual on October 28, 2018, 03:53:25 PMPersonally, I think both this and our immigration laws needs to be updated.As for 'birthright citizenship', a child should be granted the same citizenship as its Mother. In the case of immigrants, both legal/illegal, should the Mother, for cause need be deported the child would remain with the Mother. Such births should be registered with/by the Embassy or Consulate of the Mothers Nationality. And perhaps that would need action by the UN for all Nations to agree with. A child born to a Mother who legally remained in the U.S. if at some time gained citizenship prior to the child becoming emancipated or an adult, would result in the child becoming a naturalized citizen, or if not the child could do so on their own once an adult, if they so wished to.
Quote from: supsalemgr on October 28, 2018, 09:04:16 PMWelcome to the forum.I believe you are onto something with this idea. I was thinking no birthright citizenship unless one of the parents is an American citizen. Could this be done just by normal legislation?
Quote from: Individual on October 28, 2018, 11:06:41 PMA Constitutional amendment would, in my opinion, be the proper way to accomplish this as it would then supersede the 14th amendment and could not be reinterpreted by our Supreme Court to achieve a political agenda other than the letter of the law.
Quote from: supsalemgr on October 29, 2018, 12:26:28 AMConstitutional amendments are a steep hill by design.