Real Time Analytics


 

Amending the 14th Amendment

I have been following the debate on Illegal Immigrants having babies on American soil in order to gain citizenship. There is a lot to consider, and a lot of pros and cons. I believe that amending the 14th amendment will cause more trouble than it would be worth. A lot of Americans will not wish to change this.

 

On the other hand something has to be done to stop the influx of citizens that have broken the laws of this country for personal gains.

 

This brings me to the discussion I wish to start.

 

There are laws on the books that in fact say that if you commit a crime you cannot profit by it. It may be argued that the Illegal Immigrant will not profit by their child being born on US soil, but this should be the courts decision. They gain educations, housing, food substitutes, employment, welfare, and Illegal entry.

 

There is a simpler solution that I think will work and would also make more since. 

 

If you and your wife both go to jail (or deported) your children become a ward of the state. You can also have a family member or friends take care of your children while your time is being served. The Immigrant goes back to their country and applies for legal entry.

 

The court can also give the parents a choice. Either your child goes to a relative/friend, is sent into foster care, or denounces the citizenship and leaves the country.

 

Lawyers love to find loopholes to twist the law for their own or their clients gain. Maybe they should try looking into this proposal.

Views: 0

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Ryan McKenzie on August 4, 2010 at 12:38pm
There is no doubt that we are in a mess with the 14th amendment. Personally, I despise the 14th because it turns the Constitution on its head. The 14th amendment has been judged by the Supreme Court to give the central government massive amounts of authority it did not have before. Basically, before the 14th amendment the states used the bill of rights to hold back the central government, but the 14th gave the central government the power to decide everything and to justify the expansion of its own powers.

Interestingly, there is strong reason to believe that the 14th amendment was never legally ratified. If the 14th was not ratified in the manner proscribed by the Constitution, then it's not part of the Constitution now. The problem, as you recognize, is that many, especially liberals and those who don't understand the negative impact of the 14th, will not wish to give it up. Also, since the 14th relates to insuring the rights of former slaves, it will also result in aiding our enemies if we attack the 14th. They will call us racists and all sorts of names and say we are trying to take away minority rights despite the fact that our intentions are to ensure rights.

I would propose that the states nullify the 14th as it was never legally ratified, but we would need to replace it. The problem is that I'm against calling a constitutional convention, and unless we have extremely strong control over the legislature it will be difficult to get a good replacement ratified.

However, If we were to replace the 14th, I would propose that the language of the first part read something like,

All persons, regardless of race or gender, born to citizens, or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States. Congress shall make or enforce no law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall it deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Permalink Reply by Alan M. Haddaway on August 4, 2010 at 1:22pm
Very good, only one problem, we both know the liberals would have a stroke. Not that I would mind that but they will call out the reserves (welfare) and it may never be changed.
I really like the idea though!
Permalink Reply by Ryan McKenzie on August 4, 2010 at 5:39pm
It's not just about illegal immigration. The biggest issue with the 14th is that it takes authority away from the states and makes the central government the end all authority of everything. The bill of rights was meant to stop the federal government from getting too powerful, but the 14th gave the power to the central government to regulate the states. That's why I changed the language above to "Congress shall make no law" because it restores the original intent of the Bill of Rights.
Permalink Reply by Alan M. Haddaway on August 4, 2010 at 7:54pm
I like Ivan's idea, only problem I see is that the kid goes back with the parents, then comes back here with the rivers of honey and 40 virgin's idea planted in their head. Or better yet as a mule for drugs.
Permalink Reply by Ryan McKenzie on August 4, 2010 at 9:45pm
No, what I proposed would not remove citizenship from anyone, just better define it for the future.
Permalink Reply by Alan M. Haddaway on August 6, 2010 at 1:38pm
No, we don't need to do that.
The court can give the parents a choice. Either your child goes to a relative/friend, is sent into foster care, or denounces the citizenship and leaves the country. The parents can apply for citizenship and return as citizens.
Permalink Reply by Alan M. Haddaway on August 6, 2010 at 8:06pm
The logic was to get the parents to denounce the childs citizenship. If they go with them they can come back with intent to harm the country.
Permalink Reply by Alan M. Haddaway on August 6, 2010 at 8:14pm
No I would try to get them to denounce the citizenship and leave.
Permalink Reply by Steve Dose on August 6, 2010 at 2:54pm
Defense of anchor babies is liberal hypocracy, AGAIN. They want us to accept socialized medicine because everybody else does it. We should have a VAT because everybody else does. We should have a NANNY state because everybody else does.
Show me one country, in the entire rest of the world, that grants citizenship to an alien child. We all know what the 12th Amendment was for and the need no longer exists.
HYPOCRITES!
Permalink Reply by Sherri on August 6, 2010 at 3:13pm
I am with the majority on this one. The parents should take the kid back with them. Anchor babies are just that....the anchor holding this ship America at bay.

As I see it, there are too many underlying negative outcomes in allowing the child to stay.
Permalink Reply by Alan M. Haddaway on August 6, 2010 at 8:10pm
I agree that's why I said they can denounce the childs citizenship if they want them to go back to their country. What parent would leave their child behind. It is a way around trying to change the 14th.
Permalink Reply by Sherri on August 6, 2010 at 8:16pm
Alan - you would be surprised at which parents would leave their child behind.....and for what reasons.....sad but true.

RSS

Tea Party Nation is a social network

 



© 2013   Created by Judson Phillips.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service

Sign in to chat!