"Bill, I don't think that they have American citizenship," he said. "And if you speak to some very, very good lawyers — and I know some would disagree, but many of them agree with me — you're going to find they do not have American citizenship. We have to start a process where we take back our country. Our country is going to hell."
O'Reilly says anchor babies do have US citizenship because of the 14th Amendment guarantee that people born or naturalized in the US and subject to its jurisdiction are US Citizens.
Legally, Trump is right and O'Reilly is wrong. Anchor babies are not American citizens even though born in the US because the parents came to the US specifically and only to get the benefits that accrue to them as a consequence of the child's citizen status. First there's the question of being subject to US jurisdiction as children of aliens. Second there's the practical issue of common sense of having ALIEN parents in total control of the child rearing process, and thereby alienating the child against the culture, government, or citizenry. REAL danger comes from alien Islamic terrorists procreating children in the US just to get the benefits of that citizenship, including hamstringing their own deportation.
We see an example of common sense restrictions of constitutionally guaranteed rights in the laws surrounding the 2nd Amendment right to keep and bear arms. The right does not apply to children under the age of 16, 18, or 21, depending on territory and weapon type, or to convicted felons or the mentally defective or illegal aliens, and the law exempts some arms like explosive devices.
And the First Amendment right of freedom of speech does not extend to libel or slander or making false statements to a government employee in performance of duty.
You see? Practical and common sense limits exist to constitutionally guaranteed rights. And such a limit definitely becomes warranted against the granting of citizenship to anchor babies whose parents rear them to have split national loyalties.
It will take a person like Donald Trump in the US Presidency to push through enactment of legislation denying US Citizenship to anchor babies, and to force the issue to a head in the US courts.
See the news story here:
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/bill-oreilly-confronts-donald-trump-130408796.html
2 comments:
Nope. Sorry. Wrong. Take a look at this article for the truth: http://www.chairez.com/why-trump-is-wrong-about-anchor-babies
While I appreciate your reasoning, I do not agree with your evident conclusion that ANYONE of non-diplomatic parentage born in the US automatically becomes a US Citizen. Public policy seems to accommodate your belief now, but that can change, and the Supreme Court can easily reinforce it, for one reason – the rules of statutory construction.
You well know that this amendment does not mean what it seems to say, because of those rules:
“A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.”
A human among the “people” whom that amendment mentions MUST have a political connection to the United States. Thus, children under 16 or 18 (depending upon the state), felons, mental incompetents, and illegal aliens DO NOT CONSTITUTE “PEOPLE” for purposes of the language in that amendment.
Congress can enact laws applying a similar restriction to “Anchor Babies” and to children of parents with interests inimical to those of the United States, such as terrorists. And the Supreme Court can so deem the applicability of the 14th Amendment language in question.
Post a Comment