|
tazzygirl -> RE: Author of Arizona immigration law wants to end birthright citizenship (5/22/2010 2:17:50 PM)
|
A child is not a criminal. The child committed no crime. The law allows the child to be a citizen of the US simply by being born here.
quote:
Tazzy, it wasn't "granted."
What's to stop a Dr. or Midwife upon learning the status of the parents from not issueing or signing a birth certificate?
Legal naturalized citizens have to go through years of jumping through hoops, all illegal aliens have to do is sneak into a foreign country and have a kid?
The 14th Amendment was drafted in 1868 to give full citizenship to freed slaves. It doesn't say anything about "granting" citizenship to the children of illegal aliens.
And Drs have no choice but to sign off on the birth certificate. They cannot refuse.
quote:
Penalties
It is a Class A misdemeanor if a person knowingly discloses the medical or health information, or knowingly induces or causes another to disclose information. It is a Class C misdemeanor if a person refuses or fails to furnish any correct information in the person’s possession affecting a certificate. It is also a Class C misdemeanor if a person fails, neglects, or refuses to fill out and file a birth certificate with TER, the local registrar or deliver the certificate upon request to the person with the duty to file it. To falsely obtain, use, or alter another person’s Certificate of Birth is a third degree felony.
http://74.6.239.67/search/cache?ei=UTF-8&p=Doctors+refusing+to+sign+birth+certificates&fr=slv8-iobit&u=www.dshs.state.tx.us/vs/handbooks/birth/birth1.doc&w=doctors+doctor+doctor%27s+refusing+refuse+refuses+sign+birth+certificates+certificate&d=DV51HO8_UuR-&icp=1&.intl=us&sig=L8Q5P.84_rkR9BiWbx5yjQ--
I doubt any Dr wants to deal with this issue.
quote:
Tazzy, it wasn't "granted."
quote:
The United States follows the principle of jus soli, which automatically gives U.S. citizenship to all persons born inside the United States. This rule does not apply to the children of certain foreign diplomats in the United States but it generally applies to everyone else.
http://www.ansarilawfirm.com/index.cfm/hurl/obj=554/USCitizenshipbyBirthDerivativeUSCitizenship.cfm
"Anchor baby" is a term used by immigration reductionists in the United States to describe a child born in the U.S. to illegal aliens. It is generally used as a derogatory reference to the supposed role of the child, who as a U.S. citizen through the legal principle of jus soli, may facilitate immigration for relatives through family reunification under the provisions of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965.[1][2][3][4][5]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anchor_baby
quote:
The 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution reads, in pertinent part, "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." This makes citizens of all persons born in the United States, provided they are subject to U.S. jurisdiction at the time of their birth - that is, they are not the children of foreign diplomats and like persons who, having diplomatic immunity, are not subject to U.S. jurisdiction while they are in the country for diplomatic purposes.
At the time the Fourteenth Amendment was ratified (1868), it excluded Aboriginal Americans because they were not considered subject to the jurisdiction of the United States and, thus, were not American citizens. Congress declared it policy to extend citizenship to all Aboriginal peoples in 1924, which was realized in 1968 with the Indian Civil Rights Act.[9]
This interpretation of "subject to the jurisdiction" of the United States was formally established in 1898 by a 6-2 decision the Supreme Court in United States v. Wong Kim Ark 169 U.S. 649 (1898). In that case, the Court found the petitioner had been born in the United States and therefore became a U.S. citizen. This could not be revoked because his parents were not American citizens at the time of his birth, or because they made several trips to China after it.[10]
However, the Supreme Court has never explicitly ruled on whether children born in the United States to illegal immigrant parents are entitled to birthright citizenship via the 14th Amendment,[11] although it is generally assumed that they are.[12] Heightened concern over illegal immigration to the United States has prompted some moves to abolish jus soli,[2][13] but these have so far failed.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jus_soli
As such, their citizenship is granted, and protected, by law. Retroactive removal of said citizenship would be challenged quickly, and upheld by the Supreme Court.
|
|
|
|
