Texas denies anchor babies birth certificates

[Camp]

There are 254 counties in Texas. Two of them (2) are pulling this stunt. All the headlines say Texas is doing this, but the state of Texas is only involved because the counties in question refuse to certify the births and hence leave Texas with no options. I guess readers find it more interesting when the see they title saying this is a state of Texas issue instead of say it is an issue for two little counties in a vast sea of counties.

 

[Jackson]

Except that's completely unconstitutional.

Funny how once upon a few years ago the wingnuts all claimed that they were going to protect the Constitution.

Lying idiots.

Senator Howard, who wrote the 14th amendment also wrote this essay on the amendment:

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.

For those who want to protect the constitution, this shows illegal aliens are not covered under the 14th amendment.
I would guess the true idiot is one who does not do their research.

 

[ogibillm]

There are 254 counties in Texas. Two of them (2) are pulling this stunt. All the headlines say Texas is doing this, but the state of Texas is only involved because the counties in question refuse to certify the births and hence leave Texas with no options. I guess readers find it more interesting when the see they title saying this is a state of Texas issue instead of say it is an issue for two little counties in a vast sea of counties.

do you think the side show government in texas will do anything about it? or are they too busy staving off invasion from jade helm?

 

[Jackson]

There are 254 counties in Texas. Two of them (2) are pulling this stunt. All the headlines say Texas is doing this, but the state of Texas is only involved because the counties in question refuse to certify the births and hence leave Texas with no options. I guess readers find it more interesting when the see they title saying this is a state of Texas issue instead of say it is an issue for two little counties in a vast sea of counties.

It has to start somewhere, right?

 

[ogibillm]

Except that's completely unconstitutional.

Funny how once upon a few years ago the wingnuts all claimed that they were going to protect the Constitution.

Lying idiots.

Senator Howard, who wrote the 14th amendment also wrote this essay on the amendment:

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.

For those who want to protect the constitution, this shows illegal aliens are not covered under the 14th amendment.
I would guess the true idiot is one who does not do their research.

i don't think that sentence says what you think it does and that it in fact says the opposite.
i also don't think it matters what he wrote after, because the text of the amendment is clear.

 

[peach174]

Doesn't say that in the Constitution, which you hold in such high esteem.
Or then is it like scientific research and findings too, like only when it fits into your little world, then its fine.
Seems religion also fills the gaps for your kind, only when it is ok with you.

They were here running their business legally.
They did not come here illegally and were not breaking the law.
It was import enough to mention it in the Court document, so yes it did have bearing on the courts decision.

Except it didn't, but it helped justify their opinion. In the dissent it clearly shows their concerns that this decision would mean that if you dropped a kid here, almost without exception, they would be an American, automatically. And that's exactly what has happened ever since.

As long as the parents are here legally, not illegally.

They were here running their business legally.
They did not come here illegally and were not breaking the law.
It was import enough to mention it in the Court document, so yes it did have bearing on the courts decision.

Except it didn't, but it helped justify their opinion. In the dissent it clearly shows their concerns that this decision would mean that if you dropped a kid here, almost without exception, they would be an American, automatically. And that's exactly what has happened ever since.

As long as the parents are here legally, not illegally.

where do you read that in the 14th amendment?

We were talking about a court case.

And the court case said it didn't matter how you got here, just were you born here? It's been treated that way ever since.

The case was based on the jurisdiction thereof, not just his birth.
"That said Wong Kim Ark has not, either by himself or his parents acting for him, ever renounced his allegiance to the United States, and that he has never done or committed any act or thing to exclude him therefrom."

 

[PaintMyHouse]

The case was based on the jurisdiction thereof, not just his birth.
"That said Wong Kim Ark has not, either by himself or his parents acting for him, ever renounced his allegiance to the United States, and that he has never done or committed any act or thing to exclude him therefrom."

It was based on the fact that while he was born to two Chinese Nationals, he was born in the US.

 

[ogibillm]

Doesn't say that in the Constitution, which you hold in such high esteem.
Or then is it like scientific research and findings too, like only when it fits into your little world, then its fine.
Seems religion also fills the gaps for your kind, only when it is ok with you.

Except it didn't, but it helped justify their opinion. In the dissent it clearly shows their concerns that this decision would mean that if you dropped a kid here, almost without exception, they would be an American, automatically. And that's exactly what has happened ever since.

As long as the parents are here legally, not illegally.

Except it didn't, but it helped justify their opinion. In the dissent it clearly shows their concerns that this decision would mean that if you dropped a kid here, almost without exception, they would be an American, automatically. And that's exactly what has happened ever since.

As long as the parents are here legally, not illegally.

where do you read that in the 14th amendment?

We were talking about a court case.

And the court case said it didn't matter how you got here, just were you born here? It's been treated that way ever since.

The case was based on the jurisdiction thereof, not just his birth.
"That said Wong Kim Ark has not, either by himself or his parents acting for him, ever renounced his allegiance to the United States, and that he has never done or committed any act or thing to exclude him therefrom."

so what do you think a baby of an illegal immigrant would do to renounce their citizenship?

 

[peach174]

The case was based on the jurisdiction thereof, not just his birth.
"That said Wong Kim Ark has not, either by himself or his parents acting for him, ever renounced his allegiance to the United States, and that he has never done or committed any act or thing to exclude him therefrom."

It was based on the fact that while he was born to two Chinese Nationals, he was born in the US.

finish the rest of it
who never renounced his allegiance to the United States.

Unlike La Raza (the race) who carry the Mexican flag and pledge their allegiance to Mexico.

By being citizens of the U.S. we are Americans first, and only, in our national loyalties.

 

[Claudette]

The case was based on the jurisdiction thereof, not just his birth.
"That said Wong Kim Ark has not, either by himself or his parents acting for him, ever renounced his allegiance to the United States, and that he has never done or committed any act or thing to exclude him therefrom."

It was based on the fact that while he was born to two Chinese Nationals, he was born in the US.

finish the rest of it
who never renounced his allegiance to the United States.

Unlike La Raza (the race) who carry the Mexican flag and pledge their allegiance to Mexico.

By being citizens of the U.S. we are Americans first, and only, in our national loyalties.

Sorry Peach. You might as well hit your head against a wall as banter with Paintmayass.

He would never admit that you were right and he was wrong.

I've got better things to do and I'm sure you do as well.

 

[peach174]

Doesn't say that in the Constitution, which you hold in such high esteem.
Or then is it like scientific research and findings too, like only when it fits into your little world, then its fine.
Seems religion also fills the gaps for your kind, only when it is ok with you.

As long as the parents are here legally, not illegally.

As long as the parents are here legally, not illegally.

where do you read that in the 14th amendment?

We were talking about a court case.

And the court case said it didn't matter how you got here, just were you born here? It's been treated that way ever since.

The case was based on the jurisdiction thereof, not just his birth.
"That said Wong Kim Ark has not, either by himself or his parents acting for him, ever renounced his allegiance to the United States, and that he has never done or committed any act or thing to exclude him therefrom."

so what do you think a baby of an illegal immigrant would do to renounce their citizenship?

You skipped a word there - allegiance.

 

[Camp]

There are 254 counties in Texas. Two of them (2) are pulling this stunt. All the headlines say Texas is doing this, but the state of Texas is only involved because the counties in question refuse to certify the births and hence leave Texas with no options. I guess readers find it more interesting when the see they title saying this is a state of Texas issue instead of say it is an issue for two little counties in a vast sea of counties.

It has to start somewhere, right?

It is going to backfire. When it gets to court the counties and perhaps even the state will demand the parents appear as witnesses. The federal courts will rule that the status of the parents are irrelevant, thus confirming the 14th Amendment has no relationship to the status of the parents. The courts will rule that not even the child need appear. The case will be decided on the medical records and hospital recording of the child named on those records as being born in the USA. The court will order certified certificates be issued by the state or the court will issue certification themselves.

 

[Staidhup]

The citizenship of the mother dictates the citizenship of the child, regardless of where it is born. Where the issue of interpretation becomes clouded is when the father and mother do not hold identical citizenship in the same country. One has to recognize that the intent and time frame the 14th amendment (civil rights) of 1868 was approved is essential to understanding the basis supporting its adoption. Legal residency in 1868 defined citizenship, provided the mother or father did not pledge allegiance to another country, had severed ties. The amendment did not apply to the Diplomatic corp residing in the US that had children during their stay, nor to foreign visitors. The issue of anchor babies will eventually be decided by the courts, not by executive order, nor individuals on this web site.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

The case was based on the jurisdiction thereof, not just his birth.
"That said Wong Kim Ark has not, either by himself or his parents acting for him, ever renounced his allegiance to the United States, and that he has never done or committed any act or thing to exclude him therefrom."

It was based on the fact that while he was born to two Chinese Nationals, he was born in the US.

finish the rest of it
who never renounced his allegiance to the United States.

Unlike La Raza (the race) who carry the Mexican flag and pledge their allegiance to Mexico.

By being citizens of the U.S. we are Americans first, and only, in our national loyalties.

That only matters because he was an American who always intended to return. Born here, born American, almost without exception. That's what the court said.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

The case was based on the jurisdiction thereof, not just his birth.
"That said Wong Kim Ark has not, either by himself or his parents acting for him, ever renounced his allegiance to the United States, and that he has never done or committed any act or thing to exclude him therefrom."

It was based on the fact that while he was born to two Chinese Nationals, he was born in the US.

finish the rest of it
who never renounced his allegiance to the United States.

Unlike La Raza (the race) who carry the Mexican flag and pledge their allegiance to Mexico.

By being citizens of the U.S. we are Americans first, and only, in our national loyalties.

Sorry Peach. You might as well hit your head against a wall as banter with Paintmayass.

He would never admit that you were right and he was wrong.

I've got better things to do and I'm sure you do as well.

When you're right, I'll let you know...

 

[Jackson]

There are 254 counties in Texas. Two of them (2) are pulling this stunt. All the headlines say Texas is doing this, but the state of Texas is only involved because the counties in question refuse to certify the births and hence leave Texas with no options. I guess readers find it more interesting when the see they title saying this is a state of Texas issue instead of say it is an issue for two little counties in a vast sea of counties.

It has to start somewhere, right?

It is going to backfire. When it gets to court the counties and perhaps even the state will demand the parents appear as witnesses. The federal courts will rule that the status of the parents are irrelevant, thus confirming the 14th Amendment has no relationship to the status of the parents. The courts will rule that not even the child need appear. The case will be decided on the medical records and hospital recording of the child named on those records as being born in the USA. The court will order certified certificates be issued by the state or the court will issue certification themselves.

Maybe there is a crack in your crystal ball.

 

[Claudette]

The case was based on the jurisdiction thereof, not just his birth.
"That said Wong Kim Ark has not, either by himself or his parents acting for him, ever renounced his allegiance to the United States, and that he has never done or committed any act or thing to exclude him therefrom."

It was based on the fact that while he was born to two Chinese Nationals, he was born in the US.

finish the rest of it
who never renounced his allegiance to the United States.

Unlike La Raza (the race) who carry the Mexican flag and pledge their allegiance to Mexico.

By being citizens of the U.S. we are Americans first, and only, in our national loyalties.

Sorry Peach. You might as well hit your head against a wall as banter with Paintmayass.

He would never admit that you were right and he was wrong.

I've got better things to do and I'm sure you do as well.

When you're right, I'll let you know...

Yeah. Uh Huh. You're just such an authority on everything. NOT.

 

[ogibillm]

Doesn't say that in the Constitution, which you hold in such high esteem.
Or then is it like scientific research and findings too, like only when it fits into your little world, then its fine.
Seems religion also fills the gaps for your kind, only when it is ok with you.

where do you read that in the 14th amendment?

We were talking about a court case.

And the court case said it didn't matter how you got here, just were you born here? It's been treated that way ever since.

The case was based on the jurisdiction thereof, not just his birth.
"That said Wong Kim Ark has not, either by himself or his parents acting for him, ever renounced his allegiance to the United States, and that he has never done or committed any act or thing to exclude him therefrom."

so what do you think a baby of an illegal immigrant would do to renounce their citizenship?

You skipped a word there - allegiance.

i have an 8 month old and he doesn't have allegiance to anyone or anything beyond his parents and maybe his sleep monkey.
is he not a citizen?

 

[Jackson]

The case was based on the jurisdiction thereof, not just his birth.
"That said Wong Kim Ark has not, either by himself or his parents acting for him, ever renounced his allegiance to the United States, and that he has never done or committed any act or thing to exclude him therefrom."

It was based on the fact that while he was born to two Chinese Nationals, he was born in the US.

finish the rest of it
who never renounced his allegiance to the United States.

Unlike La Raza (the race) who carry the Mexican flag and pledge their allegiance to Mexico.

By being citizens of the U.S. we are Americans first, and only, in our national loyalties.

That only matters because he was an American who always intended to return. Born here, born American, almost without exception. That's what the court said.

Obviously a lower court with a liberal judge. I think it should be appealed until it goes to the SC who will read what the intent was and is.

 

[bravoactual]

Texas Denies Birth Certificates to Children of Immigrants

Good job Texas! Leading the nation in common sense once again!

Maybe Texas should the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America.