Your welcome, it’s hard to get anywere when emotions are raging.

“Whether our government or courts will start to honor and uphold the supreme law of the land for which they are obligated to by oath, is another very disturbing matter.”

The Founders were terrified and warned us that the courts could get to the point of God like power. For 150 years the courts were held very carefuly within bounds.
Activist courts have been allowed to subvert our nation to a horrible extent since WWII when liberalism really started taking off.

It’s unlikely a prosecution by the Feds will put the 14th before the SCOTUS, only a specific type of law suit brought by a petitioner that can show damages arrising from the wrongful interpretation of the citizenship claus of the 14th ammendment would have a chance or I beleive that would be the case.

Conservative-Liberal, it’s supposed to be a free country, you’re welcome to an opinion.

Whether our government or courts will start to honor and uphold the supreme law of the land for which they are obligated to by oath, is another very disturbing matter.

how does one to bring something like this to the attention of SCOTUS? Having SCOTUS clarify this seems a lot easier than amending the constitution – but then we’d be accused of practicing “judicial activism.”

And I will state again for the record, I AM NOT A LIBERAL.

Now. I have to go feed the family.

Nighty night!

And Speakup, thanks so much for the link and for not getting upset with me, unlike others on this board.

I do not, however, condone the behavior of their PARENTS. You will be hard pressed to find anything that I’ve said that indicates otherwise.

I am growing tired of this conversation.

I realize, Starblazer, that the parents are illegal. It is my interpretation that this is the crux of the problem – people coming here to have their babies so the babies will be citizens.

And again, I am not a liberal. There are plenty of people on this site who can vouch for that.

Speaking of, anyone here willing to lend me a hand on this one?

Anchor babies are not American Citizens.
Their parents are foreigners…aliens…this means they are not American Citizens.
THIS IS IN OUR CONSTITUTION!!!

Where?? I’m just not finding it…

I thought an ‘anchor baby’ was a baby born of illegal immigrants ON AMERICAN SOIL, thus ‘anchoring’ the family firmly in the U.S. just because of the child’s legal status. having one member of the family a U.S. citizen ‘anchors’ the entire illegal family here.
Have I somehow misinterpreted this????

What is to become of him (and all the other anchor babies) if his parents are deported? These children are CITIZENS. we can’t just SEND THEM BACK.

Just what kind of parents would want to leave their child behind, if deported? How could that child left behind ever truly live the “better life” here in the U.S., void of the love, comfort and protection of his Mother and Father?

As a vulnerable child, if I had the choice of living with my parents or living on the greatest place on earth without my parents, I would have chosen the former. IMHO the cohesive family unit takes precedence over the expensive condo unit.

The BEST AND MOST EFFECTIVE way to punish a child is to take him away from his parents and that is exactly what will happen if we start deporting illegal immigrants who have anchor babies.

Nowhere in the constitution or in our immigration laws does it state deported illegal immigrants are denied the right to take their naturalized children with them. If the parents choose to leave them behind, they are dishing out the punishment, they are responsible for the consequences of their actions – not our government.

Yes it’s a gut-wrenching decision, but one that could have been avoided by obeying our laws in the first place. I too have sympathy for any child found in this predicament through no fault of his own. I have none, however, for the parents who created this dilemma.

I never thought I would ache for Janet Reno…

Theworldisnotenough on October 4, 2006 at 2:00 AM

aka Uncle Janet.

Of course, Uncle Janet wouldn’t do anything about this – she only believes in sending ‘illegals’ back when they are political refugees from a slave state like Cuba (waits for one of our liberal trolls to chime in about their great health care).

Poor little Saul has been pumped by amnesty advocates so much his growth is probably stunted.
As much as I would never wish Saul ill, he isn’t a citizen of the United States and neither are the children of other non naturalized residents.
The Fourteenth Ammendment was never intended for the children of foreign nationals.
Properly clarified, only citizens can make citizens.
I sincerly hope that SCOTUS will soon take a case that would clarify this issue.

yes, SCOTUS does need to hear a case such as this. you are correct when you state that the intent of the amendment as presented 150 years ago was that ‘citizens make citizens.’ but, it has been misinterpreted for well over a century.

BTW, I am not at all an apologist for illegal immigration. I just fail to see how sending back the illegal immigrants and leaving their minor children to fend for themselves is going to solve the problem. IMHO, it will create more problems than it will solve.

that being said, I have to go pick up the kiddos and do the ‘afternoon mom thing.’

xoxo

and HE’S NOT AN AMERICAN CITIZEN. his mother came here ILLEGALY & BROKE THE LAW!!

Starblazer, i don’t want to get testy with you, but…

Saul Arellano, who is an American citizen, appeared with U.S. Rep. Luis Gutierrez at a meeting of the Hispanic Congressional Caucus Institute earlier Tuesday, then went to the White House with the Chicago Democrat and members of Centro Sin Fronteras.

emphasis mine.

you are wrong. regardless of whether his parents broke the law or not, the fact remains the same: the child is a U.S. CITIZEN.

so, do you STILL think we should deport our own minor citizens?????

By P.A. Madison
Former Research Fellow in Constitutional Studies
Last updated 6/2/06

We are fortuante to have the highest possible authority on record to answer this question of how the term “jurisdiction” was to be interpreted and applied, the author of the Citizenship Clause, Sen. Jacob M. Howard (MI) to tell us exactly what it means and its intended scope as he introduced it to the United States Senate in 1866:

Mr. HOWARD: I now move to take up House joint resolution No. 127.

The motion was agreed to; and the Senate, as in Committee of the Whole, resumed the consideration of the joint resolution (H.R. No. 127) proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States.

The first amendment is to section one, declaring that all “persons born in the United States and Subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the States wherein they reside. I do not propose to say anything on that subject except that the question of citizenship has been fully discussed in this body as not to need any further elucidation, in my opinion. This amendment which I have offered is simply declaratory of what I regard as the law of the land already, that every person born within the limits of the United States, and subject to their jurisdiction, is by virtue of natural law and national law a citizen of the United States. This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the Government of the United States, but will include every other class of persons. It settles the great question of citizenship and removes all doubt as to what persons are or are not citizens of the United States. This has long been a great desideratum in the jurisprudence and legislation of this country.[1]
http://idexer.com/citizenship.htm

like i said in my last post, the U.S. military needs to go into that church & deport that illegal immigrant & her son back to Mexico & make sure that they do it the right way.

It is a HUGE problem. trust me, I live in south texas. but punishing the children and making them wards of the state is NOT going to solve the problem of illegal immigration. And we CAN’T force these CITIZENS to leave the country!!

That little boy has been used and the intention was to make us all cry a river of tears. I cry for him because of his situation and don’t believe that ANY child should be punished for the sins of his parents. The BEST AND MOST EFFECTIVE way to punish a child is to take him away from his parents and that is exactly what will happen if we start deporting illegal immigrants who have anchor babies.

BTW, I am NOT a bleeding heart liberal. I am just realistic.

The way to solve the anchor baby issue is to amend the constitution. Until then, we are going to have to deal with it.

There is no easy solution.

That’s not a Regis suit. That’s a Rod Roddy suit.

Lol! Man, you’re right!