This entire hypothetical scenario below was inspired by this thread: A Kansas chemistry professor got his kids ready for school — then ICE arrested him on his front lawn 2 people enter the country on a TEMPORARY visa. Once there, they have children. Do you believe these children should automatically be granted citizenship? Never mind what the Fourteenth Amendment says, do you personally believe these children should be granted U.S. citizenship based simply on the fact that their parents decided to start a family while they were staying in the U.S. on a temporary visa, that's what I'm asking. Now, let me also pose a slight variation of this scenario. Suppose the visa was only good for 3 years but the parents ignored the law and stayed for 16 years, and all during that time the law was not enforced. So now you have a 14 year old and 12 year old child that grew up their whole lives in the U.S. and were born there. But the parents are then given notice that they have overstayed their visa and have to immediately leave the country or they will be subject to arrest and deportation. Do you think that these children should be granted U.S. citizenship in this case?
So, if it were up to you and you were the one writing the law, and if there was no 14th Amendment, you would automatically grant citizenship to every baby born in the U.S. ? Even if both the parents came from India on a tourist visa and the wife was already pregnant and she gave birth there? Should the parents automatically get to stay longer in the U.S. because they gave birth to a child on U.S. soil? (i.e. Anchor baby)
As the law stands now the children have citizenship. The parents do not however and should either be kicked out or should make themselves known. If the parents worked and paid taxes and didn't live on any assistance then they can pay a fine and become citizens. If they broke the law of lived on public assistance then the children can still stay but the parents should have all of their assets seized and be deported. Its not rocket science.
No I wouldn't I would limit it to naturalized citizens but would grandfather them in with the parent in question, if the children are a burden say one is disabled and needs support you could deny citizenship for that reason to the parents, as one example of the good a law would do over a Constitutional mandate.
Can I add another scenario to this poll? What about those who are coming here to give birth for the specific purpose of their child being granted citizenship. I think this scenario is far more nefarious than those who have come over under a Visa and have children as a normal course of nature. I will say that I think we need to look at the 14th Amendment. When it was written our country was desperately trying to increase our citizenship. The purpose is no longer necessary in its current form, imo.
What's going to happen when you have 12 year old children with U.S. citizenship and the parents are deported? In many cases the parents are going to want to leave the child in the U.S. for the schools, so they'll be educated in English. But then some of these children are also going to live unsupervised, or live in poverty with no parent to support them (except a small amount of money their parents manage to send them from overseas). That's a reality that's already happening. Or do you let the child stay in the U.S. and have the taxpayers pay for a foster home?
Regardless of what I believe or disbelieve, until you nullify the illegally ratified 14th Amendment, if you're born in the United States, you are a citizen. To amend the Constitution would take more effort than to have the people who cry and complain about the situation rebel against the 14th Amendment.
That's not what I was asking about. I was asking, hypothetically, if there was no 14th Amendment, what do you think the law should be. In addition to that I'm also asking, if the children do get citizenship, what do you do with the parents, and if you deport the parents what do you do with the children who are now regarded as citizens? It seems like a messy situation.
I wish you the very best of luck. I've been asking the anti-immigrant lobby a rhetorical question that is much like yours for over ten years. They see me as the enemy, but let's look at this realistically: Suppose the anti-immigrant lobby "wins." They build a wall and deport millions of people. Some will stay - especially those with American children and one parent with legal status. You take the breadwinner out of the picture and we pick up the tab for three or four more welfarites. Others will take their U.S. born children with them. Then, in a few years, those children get a little older and start showing up at the border. They have their birth certificate and Socialist Surveillance Number ...ooops, "Social Security Number." They are Americans. And now, they have no education, no job skills, no money, and no family support system (you deported their family.) What are you going to do with them? They will come here by the MILLIONS! IF the 14th Amendment were to be nullified, we'd go back to the law as it was interpreted by the United States Supreme Court. Back then, citizenship was a privilege bestowed only upon white people. Yeah, I've heard it all before - that's racist and all. HOWEVER, the same people making that argument say we need gun control AND who do they use as model countries? They use those countries that are the most homogeneous. When they advocate gun control, it's cool to be Japanese (and Japan proclaim themselves to be the most racially pure country in the world.) They have even told us about Iceland and other countries that are predominantly one race of people. I think you have to take the good with the bad. Multiculturalism is a social experiment that failed. I don't hate other people, but our Constitution was geared toward one people - just as Japan, North Korea, Zimbabwe, China, and even the Israelis are. I would not kick people out. I'd let the market decide that. They can be here as guest workers, employers could hire whomever they wanted, and they pay taxes like everyone else. The government alleviates the problem by offering companies sizable tax incentives to hire an all American staff, take people off welfare, unemployment, disability, etc. Further, they would give an additional tax break for those companies that start their employees off at a wage 15 percent above poverty level. In time the situation would be self correcting.
According to the law, brushing aside 14A, if the parents have a recognized legal, albeit temporary recognized domicil, then their children are born recognized citizens here. Same as above, if the parents legally entered the US, then the US recognizes a temporary legal domicil, and before the parents can be deported, by law, they are allowed the opportunity to apply for and adjust their status.
