Rand Paul, the Republican US senate candidate, has said he opposes citizenship for children born in the US to parents who are illegal immigrants.
I think they should be made to return to their parents country but retain dual citizenship until the age of twenty one. If they decide to return to the US and claim their US citizenship they should be made to pass a citizenship test before entry.
What happens to the parents in this situation? Are they allowed to stay? If so, sounds like the perfect way for them to stick around legally.
I am sorry. I did not make that clear. Yes the parents should be made to return to their homeland regardless of their children being born in the US. This would keep the parent with the child.
That's how it should be.
They should go the route of becoming legal citizens the right way instead of using their kids as tools for entry.
I don't see what any of them are scared of unless their intentions are to do criminal activity.
I've been an American citizen for over 50 years, and I have to show my driver's license and cater to the new rules of whether they'll even let me SMILE when my driver's photo is taken,
so by George I get tired of hearing immigrants whine about being asked for identification and riling up other States, even, against their fellow States like Arizona.
Rand Paul also said BP shouldn't be held too responsible for the oil spill. Rand Paul is not a champion against the big financial institutions like his dad is. He is an opportunist and a demogogue.
Rand Paul, go away.
In Ireland if two people who are illegal here, have a child here, the possibility is that they all get to stay after a long court battle
Everyone who wants to be a U.S. citizen should have to pass a test, regardless of the parents legal status. That would pretty much spell the end of the GOP. Simply being born here (a totally random occurence) has no bearing on a person's ability to contribute to American society.
Those who do not pass the test should be quarantined in Alaska.
What kind of 'test' exactly? Academic? About the political system? Dunked into the water and burnt at the stake if they don't drown?
Not that its particularly relevant to me, I want to live in Spain, where you just need an EU passport....
Yes, the dunking test is a good idea. As Brenda will surely attest, God will intevene and save any potential citizen who is worthy of the term "American".
are u kidding! wait till you get to spain, its not as easy as you'd think...
Then we could have a "No Citizen Left Behind Act"
Ron, so true, all conservatives are idiots and liberals are all Mensa calibre huh? I occasionally find you tolerable, but seriously, this is flat out ridiculous. I agree that there are some nut-cases on the right, but you think the far left is not the same? I will put my degree and IQ toe to toe with you any day buddy.
I accept your bold challenge. My IQ will meet yours by the swings after school.
There is a lot of grey areas and it appears that these are exploited by people who may not have the nations best interest at heart
Would it be fair to say that if all foreigners were returned to their own country from American - the native Indians would be the only ones left - where did America draw the line about who is and who is not a foreigner and who is and who is not illegal Just asking
Yes that would be fair.... in fact we would all end up in Africa eventually if every country followed that principle... That would be awful wouldn't it? Imagine all those simple minded rednecks descending on Ireland and England... I would have to cut myself into half and then one half into half again. Ireland would get a quarter of me, what part of my body would you like? Half of me would stay in England....
Ryan! did you just imply that all Americans are simple minded rednecks!
Well, at least a small portion of me would be able to stay here in America then...
Children born to illegal immigrants while in the US should be treated the same as a child born to a foreigner who is visiting another country. (a comprehensive look at different laws throughout the world before determining what ours would say) Does this mean: Dual citizenship? Apply for citizenship? Entitled to citizenship? No citizenship? Its up to the parents? Its up to the country of birth? Its up to the country of residence?
What does Mexico say about children born to their legal citizens while in a foreign country? Are they dual citizens or not citizens at all? Does Mexico take any responsibility for these children?
I'm all for the Arizona law, but I'm against leaving these innocent children without a homeland.
The American Indians are also not native to this country. They migrated here from Asia for the most part.
My baby was automatically an American citizen because her daddy is a US citizen white American and my baby was born here in the US, and I was not an American citizen then when she was born.
my friend in australia married an australian citizen and her baby was born in Australia, she has to wait for four years till she became a Aus citizen before the baby became an Aus citizen, I think it is the same in UK..
Another friend who wasn't an American citizen married an American citizen, she gave birth to their baby in the Philipines, automatically the baby is American citizen as the dad is American citizen
It is complicated, the rules on citizenship here in the US is more lax comparing to UK or AUS
Citizenship bear the rights and privileges of a citizen and that is very important,
Affinity is also important, my baby's physical characteristics is more white than Asian, but I try to teach her the values of two different cultures. Of course English is her primary language as that what is spoken here, but not trying to confuse her, I don't speak with her in Filipino, at times only.
How inappropriate would be for her to wait until she is 18 before she can have privileges of a citizen.
I think that it has all gotten confused.
I think your baby should be a US Citizen because one of her parents hold US citizenship and she was born in the US. You of course would have to apply for citizenship as you were born in the Phillipines and immigrated here.
The part I have a problem is with both parents who enter the US illegally and have a child here and expect the child to have automatic citizenship. The child while being raised by the illegal parents should stay with the illegal parents as they are deported to their original country. The child should hold the rights of dual citizenship until the age of twenty one or become a US citizen if and when their parents became legal US citizens. If the parents did not become legal US citizens then the child will have the choice of becoming a US citizen at the age of twenty one and passes the citizenship test conducted by the US Government.
I agree with @rhamson it has all gotten confusing. I thought I was firm on my position with this issue before I began reading everyone else's position. In short if a child is born in the US they should be citizens of the US regardless of the parents being here illegal. To me there really is not a simple solution.
Ohma I never knew that about Indians - how did they travel to America - and what period - serious question
The Indians traveled to America by foot a long, long time ago and were not considered Indians. (when Russia and Alaska were connected by a land bridge)
(sorry Ohma, I got here first)
Children born in America should not get citizenship.
I find this filled with ambiguity, first off. A child's citizenship should be based on the citizenship of the family it is born to in the first place.
Providing the family has citizenship, then the child does. If the parents do not, then the child does not.
How difficult is that?
There is a wealth of legal battles that could ensue for the courts to figure out if that was the case.
What if one or both of the parents were not US citizens and serving in the US military to gain US citizenship?
What if at child were born overseas at the time of the parents being granted US citizenship?
What about the child being adopted by US parents from a foreign country?
There are a myriad of loopholes that a good lawyer could apply and tie the courts up for years.
In your opinion.
Well, I would certainly hope that ALL military personnel are U.S. citizens to begin with. Otherwise, they should not be serving in AMERICA's Military. I would have thought that was obvious, even for lawyers.
I guess that would depend on the time and specific of each situation, now wouldn't it.
What about it? That's adoption. Nice to see you know how to get off topic of being born here. DUH!
If that was the best you can do, I think you need to review or change your perspective.
In fact a lot of immigrants are granted status if they join the US armed services and are granted citizenship if they complete it.
Sorry that you have taken such a defensive tone and that maybe you wouldn't have such attitude if you knew a little more about the subject.
But, alas that seems to be your M.O.
Have a nice day
rafini - many thanks I really must read up on this as it is very interesting - I only watched the movies - John Wayne etc so apologies to all you native Americans where ever you come from
Isn't there a nickname for mexicans because their women cross the river just before they give birth to get their family in to America?
I think the children born in America thing is a bit of a cop out to be honest, my immigration is costing close to three grand, seems a bit unfair!
Germany is one country that changed that long ago, isn't it? My aunt and uncle had children in Germany - my aunt is American, my uncle is Italian, the two kids were born in Germany. They had to wait until age 18 to choose which of three citizenships they wanted. No one considered Germany, it was a circumstance and had nothing to do with who they are. They both chose American citizenship but they were choosing between American and Italian. And now I believe, Germany wouldn't be a choice.
Most people don't know that the "child born in the US is a citzen" law was enacted after the Civil War. It was to give the emancipated slaves the right of citizenship, since it was impossibly impractical to send several generations of freed slaves back to Africa.
Aaah, makes sense now, thanks for that info. So it's no longer necessary, nor is it beneficial to the country.
I really don't understand all this debate here, it seems pretty simple to me: "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." That would be the 14th Amendment, which is in fact part of the United States' Constitution. It would seem to pretty much put paid to the idea of doing anything else. Unless you want to concede that the Constitution is a flawed document (which is actually fine by me, but most people on the conservative side of the immigration debate are a bit uncomfortable with that).
The 14 Amendment is just that - an Amendment to the original Constitution and can be repealed.
The chances of getting an amendment changed are REALLY small, but strophios hit the nail on the head, this is a settled issue and I doubt anyone has the stones to suggest we change the Constitution. Though I am generally for strong immigration enforcement, if a child is born here they are a citizen, simple as that.
Section 1. 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. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State 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.
So are you saying the writers of the 14th amendment couldn't possibly have made a mistake?
Prohibition was also an amendment you know, and repealed because it was an obvious mistake....?
The 14th amendment was right and necessary for the time it was written,(150 years ago) because it gave citizenship to the recently-emancipated slaves that had been born in this country. That was the purpose and intention of the law.
Yeah, I saw your other post.
I agree it was right and necessary for the time it was written, but I do feel changes need to be made since it does not specifically reference illegal immigrants.
Of course there have been mistakes, prohibition was a mistake in the way it was implemented (i.e. there was no need to try and restrict alcohol use/sale with a constitutional change.) HOWEVER, I also believe that we should not go around changing our Constitution because of what we think the intent was....and yes, I consider the amendments as part of the Constitution. Time and again the forefathers (and I will count Lincoln as one of them) have proven that they had amazing forethought.
I am about as strong on immigration as anyone here, but I do not think there is a compelling reason to change our definition of who is a citizen, such a small number of people are affected by this that it seems more like a political statement than anything else.
Okay, so an amendment to the constitution, which was written and ratified prior to the creation of the first immigration laws but has an undesired affect on such laws, doesn't deserve a second look?
I think it does.
I just think this is not anywhere near important enough to be concerned with. What are we talking about, a few thousand, maybe 10k a year? That is NOTHING! Getting sidetracked on things like this will be the death of the resurgence of the right in this country!
lol okay, a few thousand what?
I believe we are talking about 12-20 million illegal immigrants in this country at this moment who are having children here who are automatically given legal citizenship status due to being born on American soil. Just how many children do you think 12-20 million illegal immigrants can have? 1 each? That equals 12-20 million legal citizens, who are not legal adults, but have parents who are illegal immigrants. Now lets be more realistic - the average number of children born to an American family is 2.5. 2.5 times 12-20 million equals: 30-50 million legal citizens, who are not legal adults, being the child of illegal immigrants.
Who do you think benefits from the 12-20 million illegal immigrants who are here with anywhere between 12-50 million babies who are legal citizens?
Who do you think determines the outcome of our national elections? You do realize illegal immigrants discovered a way to vote with multiple fake id's, right? Remember the 2000 election between Bush & Gore? What do you think happened there?
Trying to change the manner in which a person becomes a citizen or not is not dealing with the issue. If you don't want those kids being citizens, then you need to get people who are not supposed to be here out of the country. You treat the disease not the symptom, that is my point.
I agree. Offhand, I don't know if any other countries have this provision for citizenship-- just being born in the country.
I disagree with this. As much as I am against illegal immigration, if the child is born on US soil, then they are a citizen, that is not up for debate without repealing the 14th Amendment, and I do not see even Paul saying we should do that.
I wouldn't think it would ever happen either.
But there has to be something done... some restrictions on it.
Too many people cross the border to have a baby then cry they can't be sperated from the baby. It cannot be allowed.
I agree with this. We need to not get caght up in these little asides, it distracts from the main issues.
#1 Secure the border. NOBODY gets through without the right paperwork. There are tens of thousands of solderiers withing 100 miles of the border (Camp Pendleton 1St marine Div., 29 Palms, Ft. Hood etc.) guarding dirt....let them guard dirt that means some dirt that matters. If you do not secure the border, the deporting, etc. does not matter as they just come back.
#2. Crack down on employers and deport the criminals.
Living for 25 years in Spain, as a foreign resident, both my children were born in Spain, and both would qualify for citizenship, but ONLY after age 18 years, having proven that they had lived in Spain mainly during that time.
i.e. there are qualifications to be adhered to.
In Ireland I have seen people swear allegance to the Irish State as they are granted citizenship - clearly this cant happen with a child, so what do we do
Should citizenship be purely based on allegance to the nation
by Cagsil6 years ago
Hey Americans,Just curious what you think. Is it time for America to close it's borders, shutdown economic aid around the world, build it's infrastructure, such as more stable housing complex, more structure...
by GA Anderson2 years ago
The controversy over birthright citizenship, (aka `Anchor babies`), seems to one of interpretation.Specifically, the 2nd hurdle to citizenship the 14th Amendment included; that the mother must be; "...subject to...
by AdsenseStrategies7 years ago
Even though there is a perception that the United States gives large amounts of aid to Africa, the fact is that the Chinese and the Arabs are licking their lips at all of that mineral resource wealth that Africa holds,...
by Credence220 months ago
The Constitution requires that an eligible candidate for president must be a naturalized citizen. That means born in the U.S. or subject jurisdiction, or not born on AMERICAN soil but either parent is an American...
by Elynjo8 years ago
Hoopla. Most of the people these days are trying so hard to be politically correct and refused to call a person who entered the United States illegally an "Illegal Alien" for fear of being branded as...
by MikeNV7 years ago
The media continues to omit the word ILLEGAL when they attack the Citizens of Arizona for taking action when the Federal Government will not.The Arizona law is NOT an anti immigration law... it's an anti ILLEGAL...
Copyright © 2017 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.