Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

It appears that AZ is going to pass another law that will deny birth certificates for babies born to illegal immigrant parents in AZ. "Anchor babies" is what AZ government calls them because when illegal immigrants have a baby in the US it forces the US to recognize them as US citizens and so they cannot be deported. This bill will end that, hopefully forcing illegals to "pull up anchor and leave".

Full article here: http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/20100612/us_time/08599199606400

Before anyone starts bad mouthing AZ laws check out Mexicos laws concerning illegal immigrants:

1. There will be no special bilingual programs in the schools.
* * * * * * * *
2. All ballots will be in this nation's language.
* * * * * * * *
3.. All government business will be conducted in our language.
* * * * * * * *
4. Non-residents will NOT have the right to vote no matter how long they are
here.
* * * * * * * *
5. Non-citizens will NEVER be able to hold political office.
* * * * * * * *
6 Foreigners will not be a burden to the taxpayers. No welfare, no food
stamps, no health care, or other government assistance programs. Any burden will
be deported.
* * * * * * * *
7. Foreigners can invest in this country, but it must be an amount at least
equal to 40,000 times the daily minimum wage.
* * * * * * * *
8. If foreigners come here and buy land... Options will be restricted.
Certain parcels including waterfront property are reserved for citizens
naturally born into this country.
* * * * * * * *
9.. Foreigners may have no protests; no demonstrations, no waving of a
foreign flag, no political organizing, no bad-mouthing our president or his
policies. These will lead to deportation.
* * * * * * * *
10. If you do come to this country illegally, you will be actively hunted
&, when caught, sent to jail until your deportation can be arranged. All
assets will be taken from you.

Good to see ONE of the 50 states growing a pair.

I don't consider Yahoo to be an authoritative source on Mexican law.

Additionally, the proposed legislation is a significant departure from past jurisprudence regarding the nature of American citizenship.

Good to know that they finally found a pair of:



Well, I am not suprised. At the very least Arizona is forcing the federal government to deal with illegal immigration. Arizona's legal population has grown tired of illegal immigration and wants it out. Therefore they wish to push people out by forcing out one of the legal ways one can become a citizen in the United States.

I personally do not like this law, but if it is passed, so long as it passes constitutional hurdles, it will be the law.

And I do not care what Mexico allows. I live in America, and what we do here is important most of all.

I though US law was that a baby born in the US was entitled to US citizenship?

In fact I read of a case of a British professor one of whose children was born while he was working at a US university, and on return to the UK there was a problem because the American child should have been sent back when his visa expired. The father had forgotten to register the birth with the UK consulate so the child did not have UK citizenship. It was all worked out though.

Kilkrazy wrote:I though US law was that a baby born in the US was entitled to US citizenship?

http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.eb1d4c2a3e5b9ac89243c6a7543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=a2ec6811264a3210VgnVCM100000b92ca60aRCRD&vgnextchannel=a2ec6811264a3210VgnVCM100000b92ca60aRCRD

Citizenship


The United States has a long history of welcoming immigrants from all parts of the world. America values the contributions of immigrants who continue to enrich this country and preserve its legacy as a land of freedom and opportunity.

Deciding to become a U.S. citizen is one of the most important decisions in an individual’s life. If you decide to apply to become a U.S. citizen, you will be showing your commitment to the United States and your loyalty to its Constitution. In return, you are rewarded with all the rights and privileges that are part of U.S. citizenship.

You may become a U.S. citizen either at birth or after birth. Individuals who are born in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction of the United States and individuals born in certain territories or outlying possessions of the United States are citizens at birth. Also, individuals born outside the United States may be citizens at birth if their parent or parents were citizens at the time of birth and other requirements are met.

Additionally, you may become a U.S. citizen after birth either through your parents, known as “derived” or “acquired” citizenship, or by applying for naturalization on your own.

For information about becoming a permanent resident (green card holder) or petitioning for family members, see “Green Card” or “Family” links on the home page.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_nationality_law#Birth_within_the_United_States

Birth within the United States
Main article: Birthright citizenship in the United States of America
Main article: Jus soli
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,[5] although it has generally been assumed that they are.[6] A birth certificate issued by a U.S. state or territorial government is evidence of citizenship, and is usually accepted as proof of citizenship.

In the case of United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898), the Supreme Court ruled that a person becomes a citizen of the United States at the time of birth, by virtue of the first clause of the 14th amendment of the Constitution, if that person is:

Born in the United States
Has parents that are subjects of a foreign power, but not in any diplomatic or official capacity of that foreign power
Has parents that have permanent domicile and residence in the United States
Has parents that are in the United States for business

dogma wrote:I don't consider Yahoo to be an authoritative source on Mexican law.

Additionally, the proposed legislation is a significant departure from past jurisprudence regarding the nature of American citizenship.

It was from a user who commented and put those in his comments. I'm sure 5 minute Google or Wiki search would reveal all immigration laws of Mexico (after all it is public knowledge that is archived publicly). Even the law libraries or uni libraries would probably have books on Mexican immigration law.

So long as it's done constitutionally (oh, kinda like SB1070) than it's all good (though I'm still of the mind that OUR constitution shouldn't do jack and gak for ILLEGALS but that's my opinion). The fact that illegals are having kids to be lawfully kept in the country is an obvious attempt at leeching off our welfare programs because now they qualify because their child is now a US citizen.

Sorry, epic fail that social program is.

Fateweaver wrote:The fact that illegals are having kids to be lawfully kept in the country is an obvious attempt at leeching off our welfare programs because now they qualify because their child is now a US citizen.

Actually, its an attempt to force naturalization. The US cannot deport its own citizens, and therefore cannot force the child to return to Mexico. Unless the state intends to make the child an orphan, the parents are granted tacit citizenship. Since citizens pay taxes, there is no 'leeching' going on.

Fateweaver wrote:
Sorry, epic fail that social program is.

Unemployment benefits are a form of welfare.

I don't see why that's a problem.

Here in Ireland they passed a law a few years back to prevent the exact same thing. Here, unless one or more (Can't even say both anymore ) of a child born in Ireland's Parents are EU Citizens, then the Child does NOT automatically gain the right to be an Irish Citizen.

Denying people born here citizenship is unconstitutional. I still think its a good idea, but it won't work. Good to see someone is finally trying to get the illegals out though.

Inquisitor Lord Bane wrote:Denying people born here citizenship is unconstitutional. I still think its a good idea, but it won't work. Good to see someone is finally trying to get the illegals out though.

Can we have a source for this? Like, say, the line in said Constitution that says "Should people illegally in the country pop out a spawn, they get to leech our welfare forevers?"

Nothing is mentioned about parents, we didn't have this problem back then. It simply says that anyone born on US soil is a US citizen. I mean as far as I know we legally could deport the parents, but that would be long and messy

We could Constitutionally deport the parents, and there is a significant history of parents being separated from their children as a result. There is also a significant history of expedited naturalization due to the presence of children, so its really a case based thing.

In any case, if this law passes, it will be immediately struck down for being unconstitutional.

The U.S. Constitution wrote:Article XIV.
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.

http://www.house.gov/house/Constitution/Amend.html

Excluding the 2nd amendment, why do Republicans hate the constitution?

In practice, everyone hates the Constitution when it countermands their political positions. Which, truthfully, is much of the reason for its existence.

So why doesn't Arizona just start Deporting parents and giving children the choice to go with them or stay in the US? Then they can do whatever they want when they grow up.

Might be a dick move RaI, but very much RaW.

Fallen668 wrote:

The U.S. Constitution wrote:Article XIV.
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.

http://www.house.gov/house/Constitution/Amend.html

Excluding the 2nd amendment, why do Republicans hate the constitution?

Largely because they don't actually know what's in it.

I don't get why Arizona thinks the US Constitution doesn't apply to them.

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1996064,00.html

Time is also running the story- so yahoos credibility isnt an issue here.

Living in Arizona, and seeing first hand how our system is exploited I hope theres a way to make this bill work.

With several other states drafting thier own versions of our SB 1070, it doesnt look like the Feds are going to be able to stop it from being enacted. Obama actually seemed rather meek/hushed after meeting with our governor a few weeks ago- where as before the meeting he was rather lippy and judgemental about the subject. Might as well push through the legislation while theres momentum to do so.

Arizona is simply using incredibly loud opinions, to try and force action from the federal government. Staying in the news, is just as important as getting into the news in the first place.

Arizona: Trying to make headlines because they have an opinion... GODDAMIT!

Gwar! wrote:So why doesn't Arizona just start Deporting parents and giving children the choice to go with them or stay in the US? Then they can do whatever they want when they grow up.

Might be a dick move RaI, but very much RaW.

I'm sure they make the effort, though not everyone believes it's the correct course of action and most logical reviews of case by case situations find favor with the naturalization of the parents over their forced deportation. It's largely an issue of case by case enforcement, and unconstitutional mass efforts to address the issue of illegal immigration via mechanisms like deportation are just indicative of americas unwillingness to realistically address the causal issues behind mass illegal migration. Until the immigration process itself is renovated to be the least bit sane programs like this will continue to arise or be struck down, and they will always have a highly negligible effect on migrant populations and the prevalence of the issue.

Gwar! wrote:So why doesn't Arizona just start Deporting parents and giving children the choice to go with them or stay in the US? Then they can do whatever they want when they grow up.

Might be a dick move RaI, but very much RaW.

Minors are not permitted to make legally binding choices.

Also, by deporting the parents Arizona would be creating a mechanism for the addition to children to the social services rolls.

So instead of having three people leech welfare, they have 1 child in an orphanage?

I wonder which costs less money actually...

Gwar! wrote:So instead of having three people leech welfare, they have 1 child in an orphanage?

I wonder which costs less money actually...

Once parents become naturalized through having a child (and going through the process) they start paying taxes. Thus they aren't leeching. If social services are aware of an immigrant couple that has had a child there aren't a large number of options, deportation of the parents has always been one of them. It's simply one of the poor options given the significantly increased cost to the state of state foster care over parent raising.

How do illegal immigrants benefit from social services?

I understand this to be a sticky subject, but I can't understand many of the assertions made about illegal immigrants.

Wrexasaur wrote:How do illegal immigrants benefit from social services?

I understand this to be a sticky subject, but I can't understand many of the assertions made about illegal immigrants.

They get emergency hospital care, but thats about the extent of it. People that advocate reducing the number of people "leeching" social services are usually not particularly studied on the subject matter itself.

Gwar! wrote:So instead of having three people leech welfare, they have 1 child in an orphanage?

I wonder which costs less money actually...

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/37596510/ns/business-personal_finance/

Assume the child becomes adopted by a rich U.S. family will cost $475,680.

http://www.startribune.com/business/96146184.html?elr=KArks7PYDiaK7DUdcOy_ncKUiD3aPc:_Yyc:aUU

$286,000 for a middle income family, and $206,000 for a lower income family.

Gwar! wrote:So instead of having three people leech welfare, they have 1 child in an orphanage?

I wonder which costs less money actually...

Illegal immigrants do not have access to welfare.

ShumaGorath wrote:

Wrexasaur wrote:How do illegal immigrants benefit from social services?

I understand this to be a sticky subject, but I can't understand many of the assertions made about illegal immigrants.

They get emergency hospital care, but thats about the extent of it. People that advocate reducing the number of people "leeching" social services are usually not particularly studied on the subject matter itself.

"Leeching" could also mean reducing the waste and mismanagement generated by the system. People will try to take advantage of the system and people who run the system must find a way to save money. A program can be run at a loss for some time, but eventually the funding will have to cease at some point.

You stop illegal immigration, and the "anchor" baby problem solves itself - no law required

Sgt_Scruffy wrote:You stop illegal immigration, and the "anchor" baby problem solves itself - no law required

Thats sort of a simplistic opinion on the issue.