Third Party & Independents Archives

Challenging Birthright Citizenship

Changing the law on birthright citizenship isn’t just a “a long and arduous path,” as Senator Cruz stated; it’s ages-old road that has had its turns and twists. So a little Latin is in order perhaps, and yes the Romans has a lot to do with that. Jus sanguinis - the right of blood literally - means you have to have one or more parent as a citizen of the state whose citizenship you are then entitled to. It’s still the way a majority of nations in the world operate today. The Americas are the great exception having put in place jus soli - right of soil - in response to the waves of migration in the previous two centuries. But there is also Lex soli: the law of the state that conditions who can claim jus soli - or birthright citizenship - and under what conditions they may do so. Europe is a case of Lex Soli, which means your parents have to meet certain legal standards for you to become a citizen of the state you were born in.

And not just Europe. Australia - a nation of immigrants if there ever was one - also has in place restrictions on birthright citizenship. And it's hardly draconian: at least one parent must be an Australian citizen or permanent resident. And that can be by the time the child turns 10 years old. Ireland is a little more restrictive: at least one parent of the child must be one of the following:
- An Irish Citizen
- A British Citizen
- A resident of Ireland entitled to reside there
- A legal resident of Ireland 3 of the 4 years before birth of the child

That's a little more fussy and deals with the particulars of Ireland's laws and customs. The point is that birthright citizenship can be and is conditioned by countries like Australia and Ireland. The 14th amendment and how it is interpreted - why it was put in place for example - is clearly a challenge and would mean, as Senator Cruz states, a long battle in the courts with no guarantee of success. As he also states, there are more pressing issues like border security and the Iran deal and the debt crisis. But there is a way forward, should any candidate choose to challenge the current interpretation of birthright citizenship.

Posted by AllardK at August 26, 2015 7:46 PM
Comments
Comment #397899

“The Americas are the great exception…”

That’s a pretty huge exception. Virtually all of North and South America, including Canada, US, Mexico, Brazil, Argentina, Venezuela, Columbia, etc. practice jus soli - right of soil. It’s basically the entire “New World.”

Posted by: Rich at August 26, 2015 10:05 PM
Comment #397905

Trump screwed up when he placed so much importance on birthright citizenship. He’s wrong to think that people born on U.S. soil shouldn’t be citizens.

They are.

The problem is people who aren’t citizens have too little restrictions prohibiting birth tourism.

The left wants to think the entire world’s population are citizens of the U.S.

It’s the duty of Citizens of the U.S. to resist this idea.

Trump isn’t wrong when he talks about illegal immigration. His focus should not be on people born here. His focus should be on people who are taking advantage of an incompetent government before those children are born.

Posted by: Weary Willie at August 27, 2015 12:34 AM
Comment #397906
The left wants to think the entire world’s population are citizens of the U.S.

The Left supports immigrants, but where do you get the idea that the Left wants to bestow citizenship onto foreigners living outside the US?

Posted by: Warren Porter at August 27, 2015 7:17 AM
Comment #397908

So does the right Warren, except for one thing and that is they want them to do it LEGALLY unlike the left who don’t care who they let into the country.

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at August 27, 2015 10:34 AM
Comment #397910

The Left supports increasing the number of legal immigrants. The Right seems uninterested in the same.

Posted by: Warren Porter at August 27, 2015 12:25 PM
Comment #397911

Even you said you are willing to let unlimited immigration to this country take place.

Before 1924, there were no numerical limits placed on immigration apart from the Chinese Exclusion Act. Open Borders at that time only served to strengthen our nation, not weaken it. I see no reason for things to be any different today.

Posted by: Warren Porter at August 24, 2015 10:15 AM

Posted by: Weary Willie at August 27, 2015 1:03 PM
Comment #397912

Warren, like I said in another comment, We can send that increased number of immigrants to your home to live so that you can support them until they find viable jobs and places to live. Warren, we need to take care of our own first, something the left forgets about, then we can think about letting an increased number of LEGAL immigrants into this country.

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at August 27, 2015 1:03 PM
Comment #397914

WW,

It remains my opinion that current numerical restrictions on immigration are senseless. I support limiting immigration to people who are healthy and willing/able to work. It is a policy identical to the one we adopted before WWI when most Americans’ ancestors came here. Did that policy strengthen the US or did it weaken it?

KAP,
Thus far, the vast number of illegal immigrants seem quite fine taking care of themselves without any involvement my nonexistent home. I fail to imagine how increased legalized immigrants would be any different. Likewise, millions of Europeans immigrated here legally over a century ago without any Americans being forced to shelter them. Your statement is absurd.

Posted by: Warren Porter at August 27, 2015 2:12 PM
Comment #397916

Warren, Over a century ago there weren’t 340 million people here. Over a century ago the Industrial revolution was beginning. So by letting all those increased people you want here we will let them stay with you wherever that may be and you can support them while they look for gainful employment and housing. Your wanting unlimited immigration is absurd, ridiculous and STUPID!!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at August 27, 2015 2:27 PM
Comment #397918

Why, Warren Porter? Why would you want unlimited immigration when almost 100 million people have quit the workforce? Wages are stagnant. Illegal immigration is swamping many of the public infrastructures, i.e. hospitals, prisons, ect. Many are criminals. Many are here for the freebies.

Why would you want this assault on our standard of living? Do you want as many people as possible here within our borders so they can be granted amnesty this time around? Is your entire premise of unfettered immigration based on a new voting block?

Posted by: Weary Willie at August 27, 2015 3:00 PM
Comment #397919
there weren’t 340 million people here. Over a century ago the Industrial revolution was beginning

So?

Why, Warren Porter? Why would you want unlimited immigration when almost 100 million people have quit the workforce? Wages are stagnant. Illegal immigration is swamping many of the public infrastructures, i.e. hospitals, prisons, ect. Many are criminals. Many are here for the freebies.

Why would you want this assault on our standard of living? Do you want as many people as possible here within our borders so they can be granted amnesty this time around? Is your entire premise of unfettered immigration based on a new voting block?


Restrictions on legal immigration are burdensome regulations that impede the free market. Posted by: Warren Porter at August 27, 2015 4:13 PM
Comment #397920

Warren, what impedes the free market is stupid, ridiculous and irresponsible ideas such as yours.

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at August 27, 2015 4:31 PM
Comment #397921

KAP,

Please do tell us how increased legal immigration would impede the free market.

Posted by: Warren Porter at August 27, 2015 6:04 PM
Comment #397922

Warren, As W.W. said we have 100 million out of work now. We have 340 million people in this country now. What is it you want to turn this country into, China, India? Why not add another 340 million? Tell me Warren, how do you propose to get these extra people jobs? How do you expect to feed them, house them? What you are saying is like a family that keeps adding children sooner or later the well runs dry and they have to stop. That is what is happening now here in the good old U. S. the well is running dry. We can not afford to keep adding people especially if we can’t get the 100 million that are currently out of work JOBS. That is where your idea is stupid, ridiculous, and irresponsible!!!!!!!

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at August 27, 2015 6:32 PM
Comment #397923

Restrictions on legal immigration are burdensome regulations that impede the free market. Posted by: Warren Porter at August 27, 2015 4:13 PM

I am pleased Warren that you are apparently in favor of a free market economy and against “burdensome regulations”. Many on the Left are not.

Rather than a FME, they favor some flavor of Socialism. Socialism is usually defined as: “a way of organizing a society in which major industries are owned and controlled by the government rather than by individual people and companies.”

and,

“a theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole.”

Posted by: Royal Flush at August 27, 2015 6:44 PM
Comment #397925

I wonder if the Romans’s sat around bemoaning their fate as we are on WB? I suspect they did.

Otherwise - - -

Posted by: roy ellis at August 27, 2015 9:40 PM
Comment #397939

Nero fiddled.

Posted by: Weary Willie at August 27, 2015 10:47 PM
Comment #397941
Tell me Warren, how do you propose to get these extra people jobs? How do you expect to feed them, house them?

The free market will provide.

What you are saying is like a family that keeps adding children sooner or later the well runs dry and they have to stop.
Last time I checked, immigrants are adults capable of taking care of themselves, not dependent children. Stop infantilizing them.
That is where your idea is stupid, ridiculous, and irresponsible!!!!!!!
So you think the idea of having a free market is stupid, ridiculous and irresponsible?

I didn’t ask for your opinion on my ideas. I asked you how would my idea impede the free market, which you have completely ignored.

I am pleased Warren that you are apparently in favor of a free market economy and against “burdensome regulations”.
Uh, this should not have been a shock. I have always believed in free markets. After all, they are the essence of liberalism.
Many on the Left are not.
From what I can tell, no one on Watchblog falls into that category. Maybe if you went to a Marxist site you might find a leftist who doesn’t understand the harm of burdensome regulations. Nobody on Watchblog has advocated for socialism as it is traditionally defined (which is the definition you provided). People such as Bernie Sanders sometimes call themselves because they support social democracy like European Social Democrats do. However, social democrats do not advocate for government control over any industries or means of production. Posted by: Warren Porter at August 28, 2015 9:36 AM
Comment #397943

How about this Warren, We get that free market to get all the unemployed, homeless, and people on welfare jobs and housing that are already here in the U.S. first before we open up our boarders to unlimited immigration? Wouldn’t that be better then letting more and more people into the U.S. that may just end up like those already here? The comment I made about the family that keeps adding children went WAAAAAAAAYYYYYYYY over your head didn’t it? Think about that statement Warren, unlimited immigrations is like a couple who keeps having children sooner or later they have to stop because they can’t afford more and more children, it’s an EXAMPLE of your stupid, ridiculous and irresponsible idea of immigration, I am NOT infantilizing immigrants.

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at August 28, 2015 10:45 AM
Comment #397945

Immigrants are adults capable of taking care of themselves. Children are dependent on their parents. There is no analogy.

We don’t pay for legal immigrants, don’t you get it?

As for the rest, it seems you don’t support the free market. I guess this is typical conservatism.

Posted by: Warren Porter at August 28, 2015 12:41 PM
Comment #397946

Those adult immigrants are beholding to the TAX PAYERS if the free market is unable to care for them Warren, THAT’s the ANOLOGY. I do support the free market but the free market can only support so much. I still think your idea is stupid, ridiculous and irresponsible and I’ll add ill thought.

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at August 28, 2015 12:53 PM
Comment #397948
Those adult immigrants are beholding to the TAX PAYERS if the free market is unable to care for them Warren

No, they aren’t. If an immigrant cannot find a job, they normally return to their country of origin.

Posted by: Warren Porter at August 28, 2015 1:55 PM
Comment #397949

Warren, Why should they go back to their home country when they could live better here off the TAX PAYERS dime? Liberals promise all kinds of free stuff.

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at August 28, 2015 2:05 PM
Comment #397952

Warren Porter’s comments display an outstanding degree of naivete. I’m actually surprised he would continue to support an unfettered immigration policy!

Perhaps he’s turned a blind eye to the “children” that have been sent across the border unaccompanied by any adults. Obama opens the gates by stating he will ignore immigration law and people go so far as to send their children into harm’s way to be subjected to weather, predators both human and animal, exploitation! Unbelievable behavior of parents bordering on child abuse…

And Warren Porter says we need more? We should promote it? We should stand back and watch it happen? We should like it and support it?

It is truly reckless to promote this type of behavior and Warren Porter deserves to have them camped out in his parent’s yard with a key to the back door.

Posted by: Weary Willie at August 28, 2015 3:33 PM
Comment #397957

However, social democrats do not advocate for government control over any industries or means of production. Posted by: Warren Porter at August 28, 2015 9:36 AM

Socialism is the next step Warren.

Posted by: Royal Flush at August 28, 2015 5:44 PM
Comment #397964

The huge waves of European immigrants during the period of 1850 to 1924 resulted in a political backlash similar to today. Crime, riots (NYC draft riot), almost unbelievable squalor and public health emergencies were commonplace in the large immigrant cities.

But, how do we remember those immigrants today? Well, we remember them fondly as our hardworking, courageous immigrant forefathers. People who made the “American Dream” a reality.

So it will be for the Hispanic and Latino immigrants of today.

Posted by: Rich at August 28, 2015 6:41 PM
Comment #398202

Michigan Sen. Jacob M. Howard.


According to The Federalist Papers Project, Howard wrote, in part, “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.”

But Howard continued, “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.”

Posted by: dbs at September 5, 2015 9:51 AM
Post a comment