PDA

View Full Version : No citizenship to children born here


gk_2000
06-15-2010, 09:28 PM
Dear IV seniors

We are in danger of losing this right, even though it appears directed at illegals. Is there anything we can do to save ourselves?

ArkBird
06-15-2010, 09:38 PM
Dear IV seniors

We are in danger of losing this right, even though it appears directed at illegals. Is there anything we can do to save ourselves?

It's just talks. I don't see it happening anytime soon with Democrats controlling House, Senate & White House. It will be political suicide for anyone who touches it. Hispanic Lobby is just too powerful...

looivy
06-15-2010, 10:16 PM
This is a racist move. If that is true then only native americans wil be citizens. Rest all are illegal in this country because most of those who came to this country in 1500s-1900s do not have paperwork. Their kids will be illegal and their kids in turn will be illegal...This thing will not go anywhere.

claudia255
06-15-2010, 10:18 PM
Will never fly. Will have to amend the Constitution. This is just theatrics.

spicy_guy
06-16-2010, 01:11 AM
Even if they do, its most likely that if parents are illegal, the children won't get automatic citizenship. This has been in the spotlight for sometime now.

edaltsis
06-16-2010, 07:44 AM
There is no wrong in this new law they wanted to bring. If one is legal there is no problem...its for those who come into the country illegally and wanted to have children for the sake of citizenship. I support this!

India_USA
06-16-2010, 08:49 AM
There is no wrong in this new law they wanted to bring. If one is legal there is no problem...its for those who come into the country illegally and wanted to have children for the sake of citizenship. I support this!

I wonder who on the Mayflower had legal papers when they landed on this soil?
Besides, a few bad apples may have had children for the sake of citizenship, but the majority of people have children as part of life. Clubbing them all together or generalizing and formulating laws that are based on senseless/foolish beliefs will be the downfall of the stature that America has built up for the past 300 years.

The way this country's laws are heading, it will no longer be called the "land of opportunities" instead it will be called the "land of whimsical laws" Because the laws are determined by chance or impulse or whim rather than by necessity or reason.

smuggymba
06-16-2010, 08:50 AM
Dear IV seniors

We are in danger of losing this right, even though it appears directed at illegals. Is there anything we can do to save ourselves?

only for illegals, does not affect us.

thescadaman
06-16-2010, 09:00 AM
We think we are legal residents but in theory we are not. We tend to forget that the definition of H1B is temporary non-resident alien. Don't confuse this definition with the IRS definition which says that we are residents. All immigration laws and rules follow USCIS definition and not IRS definition.

All these new bills say that US Citizens and legal residents will not have issues. We all should understand that "temporary non-resident alien" is not included in that safe-list. As a matter of fact, our category is completely ignored.

Its a different topic all together to discuss if any bill can be passed which calls for the amendment of the constitution. BUT please don't think our kids are not covered by this anti-Immigration bills.

shreekhand
06-16-2010, 09:16 AM
For those who think this is an exceptional, unprecedented proposal, you just need to know that the current US law (of granting citizenship to whoever is born on US soil) is actually a very unique one. Almost all European nations, India and China among many others do not grant citizenship on birth.

I truly think it is high time the US only grants citizenship to babies whose parents are legal residents (LPR's is even better)!

h1techSlave
06-16-2010, 09:19 AM
Your logic is very correct. But the US is the only few remaining countries having automatic birthright citizenship. Most of the counties including India and China have abandoned that practice. Out of around 200 countries in the world, only around 35 still has birthright citizenship.

So whether we like it or not, birthright citizenship is a sinking ship; one which is sinking pretty fast.

Reference: Jus soli - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jus_soli)

I wonder who on the Mayflower had legal papers when they landed on this soil?
Besides, a few bad apples may have had children for the sake of citizenship, but the majority of people have children as part of life. Clubbing them all together or generalizing and formulating laws that are based on senseless/foolish beliefs will be the downfall of the stature that America has built up for the past 300 years.

The way this country's laws are heading, it will no longer be called the "land of opportunities" instead it will be called the "land of whimsical laws" Because the laws are determined by chance or impulse or whim rather than by necessity or reason.

solaris27
06-16-2010, 10:09 AM
I think its for illegal only

chi_shark
06-16-2010, 10:35 AM
I wonder who on the Mayflower had legal papers when they landed on this soil?
Besides, a few bad apples may have had children for the sake of citizenship, but the majority of people have children as part of life. Clubbing them all together or generalizing and formulating laws that are based on senseless/foolish beliefs will be the downfall of the stature that America has built up for the past 300 years.

The way this country's laws are heading, it will no longer be called the "land of opportunities" instead it will be called the "land of whimsical laws" Because the laws are determined by chance or impulse or whim rather than by necessity or reason.

pardon me! i seem to to be taking an anti stance on many people's post here in the recent past...

but i beg the question: are the laws in your home country very un-whimsical that you are trying to label the laws of this country? also, why dont you try getting on a raft call it mayflower and land on the shores... maybe they will let you in.

ivgclive
06-16-2010, 12:10 PM
We think we are legal residents but in theory we are not. We tend to forget that the definition of H1B is temporary non-resident alien. Don't confuse this definition with the IRS definition which says that we are residents. All immigration laws and rules follow USCIS definition and not IRS definition.

All these new bills say that US Citizens and legal residents will not have issues. We all should understand that "temporary non-resident alien" is not included in that safe-list. As a matter of fact, our category is completely ignored.

Its a different topic all together to discuss if any bill can be passed which calls for the amendment of the constitution. BUT please don't think our kids are not covered by this anti-Immigration bills.

If you are worrying too much, get married soon and get couple of kids make sure that they are born before they change the rule.

They can not apply it for kids already born.

I see it in a different way. If they enforce the rule backdated, I am more happy that my kids become citizens of my own country, so when I go back I don't have to go thru HELL like renewing passports, PIO cards etc etc. They go to school freely without the NRI crap.

Buddy, this is not a reasonable thing that you should worry about.

Sachin_Stock
06-16-2010, 12:15 PM
I totally support this move though. If its read correctly, illegals cannot just lay their eggs in here and claim citizenship.

However please read it carefully. This applies only for undocumented people. Not for legal immigrants or those who are working as highly skilled/exceptional workers (H1-B).

MCQ
06-16-2010, 12:57 PM
This latest proposal from Arizona is unlikely to ever succeed.

It is clearly Un-Constitutional, as the Constitution is currently written, as it falls foul of Section 1 of the 14th Amendment. some background below ........

"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. "

For Arizona to succeed in this ill-advised adventure and deny citizenship to the children of illegal aliens and have it retroactive, two changes to the Constitution would need to be made.

1. Section 1 would need to be modified to say that your parents would need to be here legally if you were to qualify for Citizenship
2. If they real did want to make this retroactive (good luck trying that - again would never fly) they would need to change the Constitution again - so as to allow the change to be retro-active - which the Constitution for the most part forbids (Article One, Section 9).

In any case - the road to a constitutional change is hard, hard enough that it has only been successfuly done twenty seven times since it was adopted in 1787 and ratified and came into force in 1789.

The process for doing so is laid out in Article 5 of the Constitution - but the upshot is as follows:

Arizona - should they choose to go down this path has to do one of two things.
EITHER - persuade both Houses of Congress to approve it - by two thirds majorities of the quorate membership of both houses AND then get the changes approved by three quarters (75% - or at this point 38 (needs to be a whole number)) of the State Legislatures to approve it - and they work to their own rules of passing a Federal Constitutional Amendment.
OR
They could ask two thirds of the States' Legislatures (need 34) to petition Congress for a Constitutional Convention to look for specific changes to the Constitution.

Although the Convention Option might seem more attractive - not one of the current 27 Amendments was proposed or adopted by this method.

I hope they don't try this - it will fail, cost a lot of money and cause anguish on both sides of the debate and probably lead to further polarisation.
On the other hand - if they do try it - then finally the Federal Government might wake up and actually do something in the sphere of CIR.

I won't be holding my breath.

Slainte!
McQ

gc28262
06-16-2010, 01:02 PM
Let us not support any anti-immigrant measures in anyway whether it is against legal/undocumented folks.

Remember the lawmakers that creates rules against these undocumented immigrants are against legal immigrants as well. Many of them are anti-immigrant, they don't want to say it aloud. So they create these rules in the "interest of US citizens".

Remember this country didn't belong to these folks who are creating these insane rules. If someone can claim true ownership of this land, it is the red indians and the mexicans. Some part of US was part of mexico in the past. Everybody else in this country is an immigrant.

On a side note isn't it ironic that all this is happening under Obama's/Democrat's watch. Some democrats along with some anti-immigrants tries to make life harder for people like us. On the other hand anti-immigrant lawmakers tries to make life harder for undocumented people ( whom administration was intending to support through CIR).

Canadian_Dream
06-16-2010, 01:09 PM
News article like this enrages me. This is a mockery of Childbirth, Parenthood, US Citizen ship, 14th Amendment and the very purpose of 14th amendment. It is sad that this cannot be stopped in the name of naked capitalism. What a sorry state of affairs. It is perhaps the news articles like these that give opponents a chance to challenge and eventually garner support for an opposing legislation that impacts everyone. The ones who will suffer the most are the unfortunate ones who might be having a child for all the right reasons. They are stuck in decade long queue - now they are either expected to wait or have a child that will inherit the legal limbo from their parents. Soon there will be immigration tracker for newborns.

This might be interesting .... please read, people exploiting this birth right law.

Immigration: 'Birth Tourism' Industry Markets U.S. Citizenship Abroad - ABC News (http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/birth-tourism-industry-markets-us-citizenship-abroad/story?id=10359956)

gk_2000
06-16-2010, 09:14 PM
I am disappointed by some posts giving support to this proposal. These guys are going to become anti-immigrants as soon as they get GCs. They will wake up only if there is a law to-

STOP GIVING CITIZENSHIP TO BABIES OF H1B, L1 AND EAD HOLDERS

Legal immigrants on visas are not citizens. Why should their babies get citizenship for free. If babies of undocumented cannot get citizenship, babies of H1B should also not get it.

There should be a limit to anti-immigrant idiotic behavior. What wrong have babies born in USA done?

It is a general tendency for some people to draw the bar just below them and cut off the slightly less fortunate onwards, so, GC might exclude 485's, and 485's exclude 140's and so on :)

gk_2000
06-16-2010, 09:17 PM
The reason for my original post is also that such movements could give us an opportunity to have our say. Maybe ask for the rewards for being on the right side of the law..