Republican Offers Questionable Bill on Citizenship, Repealing Portion of 14 Amendment
Rep. Elton Gallegly (R-CA) has introduced HR 126 (again, no co-sponsors) that would, in effect, begin limiting exactly who would become US citizens (read: an attempt to deal with immigration):
To amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to limit citizenship at birth, merely by virtue of birth in the United States, to persons with citizen or legal resident mothers. (Introduced in House)
Yes, I know — I had to do about 3 double-takes to really get this one in my head. What’s more:
SECTION 1. LIMITING CITIZENSHIP AT BIRTH, MERELY BY VIRTUE OF BIRTH IN THE UNITED STATES, TO PERSONS WITH LEGAL RESIDENT MOTHERS.
(a) In General- Section 301(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1401(a)) is amended by inserting before the semicolon the following: `, of a mother who is a citizen or legal resident of the United States’.
(b) Effective Date- The amendment made by subsection (a) shall apply to persons born after the date of ratification of an article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States that repeals the first sentence of section 1 of the fourteenth article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States. [emphasis mine]
Here’s the appropriate 14th Amendment verbiage:
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. [emphasis mine]
It is the emboldened part that would have to be removed.
How would this affect immigrants? Interestingly, a cursory Google News search turned up the following from a Korean newspaper site:
Limiting Birthright Citizenship in U.S. Proposed
For years, many expecting Korean mothers have flown over to the U.S. so their children can have American citizenship, but that airplane ticket may be of no use in the future.
The U.S. currently adopts a territorial principle that provides citizenship to anyone born in the country, regardless of the parents’ nationalities.
But a Republican congressman, Elton Gallegly, has introduced a bill that would make it more difficult to obtain citizenship merely by being born on American soil.
There have been many attempts to abolish the principle but none have succeeded.
Arirang News
Apparently, this is one Republican who appears to support modifying the Constitution over coming up with reasonable, fundamental reform of federal laws enforcing America’s borders.
-Phil
As CAL stated, Bingham did not intend what we have today. Due to straying Supreme Court decisions that twisted it, the 14th needs clarification. Gallegly is exactly right to introduce this bill. Anchor babies are only one of the problems contributing to out of control illegal immigration numbers; this wording effectively takes that motivation away from expectant parents who have not yet crossed the border illegally.
He doesn’t, he just thinks we are that stupid to believe it. If this many truely believed in the Constitution and the ‘natural born’ clause then he would have stood up on January 8, 2009 and challenged Obama’s eligibility.
This is a smoke screen to get the Constitution changed. What if SCOTUS does come back and says Obama is not qualified and they get the Constitution changed so that he does become qualified?
I think this is the underlying motive behind it!
I believe that they (those in charge and want to destroy this nation) can afford to wait 4 more years to succeed if need be. By then, they will have succeeded in getting rid of everything/anything and possibly anyone who would stand in their way.
I think we should all write this man and ask him what his true motives are and why he didn’t stand up on January 8, 2009 if he felt so strongly about it.
CAL,
Makes perfect sense to me. I’m simply wondering why this Representative believes that mucking around with an Amendment is the best way to go in dealing with immigration.
Thanks for the comment,
-Phil
Bingham, one of the writers of the 14th amendment, did not intend for all people born on US soil to become citizens. The “under the jusrisdiction of” clause meant that if the parents were under the jurisdiction of another sovereign, their child would not be a citizen of the US. If the parents were under the jurisdiction of the US, meaning they themselves were US citizen, then their child would be a citizen of the US.
I agree Phil. It seems that everyone wants to modify the Constitution today to advance thier own agenda. In a short while, we won’t have much of a Constitution or a Constitutional Republic left.
Iraq War: Unconstitutional
Income Tax: Unconstitutional
Federal Reserve: Unconstitutional
Patriot Act: Unconstitutional
Bailout of Financial Institutions: Unconstitutional
Money to Automakers: Unconstitutional
Non-Natural Born Citizen as Potus: Unconstitutional
Enough said? Well, we’ll just have to wait until next week to add a few more to the above list.
Yes sir. Congress knows nothing about Obama’s citizenship issue (note the sarcasm).
Where was Mr. Gallegly on January 8??? Asleep at the wheel?
Interesting! While reading this I wondered, “What happens if
a American Female Citizen is pregnated by a Foreigner’s female
egg and Foreigner’s Male Sperm and has a child born on U.S. Soil?
Also, what about International Law that “children” shall inherit
the Nationality & Citizenship of the “Father”?
In Obama’s “case”, we do not truly know “Who” the biological Father is. Some say that Frank Marshall Davis may be the Father.
http://brianakira.wordpress.com/2008/10/23/the-real-obama-barry-davis-dunham-son-of-a-child-molester/
Let there be NO Doubt’s”.
In Today’s Day and Age, there should be DNA Testing included for
anyone inspiring to run for Office of the Presidency.
I may be mistaken, but I alway’s thought that “Both” Parent’s of
a “child born” must be a U.S. Citizen in order for the “child” to be a “Natural-Born Citizen”. Dan