Quote:
Originally Posted by PochoPatriot
OK, I think we are having miscommunication. The term "anchor baby" refers to children born in this country to illegal alien parents. Current case law has been that these children ARE citizens of the United States by "jus soli" (literally "law of ground) or birthright citizenship. This was established in US vs Wong Kim Ark (169 US 649 [1898]). Whether or not we like this law is irrelevant since this is law, and while it can and should be change to affect future anchor babies, it cannot be made retroactive
...
|
"Whether or not we like this law is irrelevant since this is law, and while it can and should be change to affect future anchor babies, it cannot be made retroactive."
Why not? Why can't we make it retroactive? Do you think we would be better off if we could make it retroactive?
Quote:
Originally Posted by PochoPatriot
....
....
To me the real problem isn't the children (anchor babies or illegals). The real problem is the government and the education system that is run by leftist and Socialists. These children are being taught that whitey is the cause of all their problems. Ironically, they are being taught this by whites, go figure.
....
|
Do you think that the children of illegal immigrants should be given any public education at all? You don't see that as being the real problem?
Quote:
Originally Posted by PochoPatriot
....
Anyway, my concern is that the Constitution be upheld regardless of our personal convictions. Sometimes I think that in our righteous anger over this illegal invasion we are suffering we say things in anger or exasperation that we may not mean. Not to mention we say things that may not meet Constitutional muster.
|
But the constitution does not speak for itself and, rather obviously, our immigration and the process by which we mint citizens has been vastly corrupted. It doesn't make much sense to try to confront the issue within the confines of what is true constitutionally when illegal immigration is operating outside of what is constitutionally true. What we say should not be limited by the constitution.
The constitution is a fluid document. It was not carved in stone by God, it was written by human beings and we agree to it as a matter of citizenship and no other reason. We could change it to make it more explicit as to the issue of citizenship and who or who should not qualify as US citizens.