Anchor Babies
- Thread starter 2quills
- Start date
2quills
Well-Known Member
But according to the Constitution if the parents are here illegally they are actually not our responsibility. I don't understand why we are illegally being forced to support them. The Constitution is actually pretty clear on this.
bang guy
Moderator
This quote is from the 14th Ammendment:
That just means it's up to the individual states to determine local law regarding anchor babies.
For me, it's the moral thing to do for someone born on US soil.
But you are correct in that the "and subject to the jurisdiction thereof" would seem to exclude illegal aliens.
That just means it's up to the individual states to determine local law regarding anchor babies.
For me, it's the moral thing to do for someone born on US soil.
2quills
Well-Known Member
Actually the amendment was ratified in 1868 and clearly excludes the children of parents who are not here legally.
I hear you on the moral thing.
So essentially, if a pregnant homeless woman gave birth on your property you would feel morally obligated to support them? What if that happened and then the following month 5 pregnant women showed up and gave birth on your property. Then 10 the following month, then 20 the month after that?
At which point do u make the determination that you can longer handle the load because it starts causing you to struggle to support your own family?
I hear you on the moral thing.
So essentially, if a pregnant homeless woman gave birth on your property you would feel morally obligated to support them? What if that happened and then the following month 5 pregnant women showed up and gave birth on your property. Then 10 the following month, then 20 the month after that?
At which point do u make the determination that you can longer handle the load because it starts causing you to struggle to support your own family?
geridoc
Well-Known Member
Illegal aliens are subject to the jurisdiction of the Federal and state governments. The only individuals in the US who are not subject to our jurisdiction are foreign diplomats, who are not subject to criminal prosecution, members of Indian tribes who are subject to tribal jurisdiction, and children born of alien enemies. I suppose, given Trump's ability to construe anything as supporting his bizarre views, he would argue that children of illegal residents are, in fact, children of alien enemies. It is also well settled law that it is not up to the states to determine law regarding "anchor babies", but up to the constitution to do so.
2quills
Well-Known Member
Subject to our jurisdiction requires a sworn allegiance to our nation. Obiously if you are here illegally that has not happened yet.
They are subject to our laws and can be prosicuted but that does not entitle them to our benefits. When an illegal is prosicuted for a crime in this country they must be deported to the country that they owe allgience to and has jurisdiction over them.
The birthright of citizenship was extended to slaves and their children as well as Eskimos and native Americans but does not include illegals.
They are subject to our laws and can be prosicuted but that does not entitle them to our benefits. When an illegal is prosicuted for a crime in this country they must be deported to the country that they owe allgience to and has jurisdiction over them.
The birthright of citizenship was extended to slaves and their children as well as Eskimos and native Americans but does not include illegals.
For the better of our own country, I'll say no. This will stop some from coming here to begin with. But, I agree with Bang Guy. The real answer is stopping the illegal immigration to begin with. I hope that we get a president this time who will take that task seriously. Obvious that won't be in any of the establishment candidates.
darthtang aw
Active Member
Illegal immigration is just a small portion of the immigration issue. Between work visas and illegal immigration both have kept wages stagnant in most industries for the last twenty years. This is a much bigger issue that needs looked at and fixed than just illegal immigrants.
2quills
Well-Known Member
What violations are being ignored? The laws as are written are allowing corporations like Disney to hire hundreds of immigrant workers and use their american workers to train them to do their jobs and then fire the Americans because the immigrants work for 40% less pay.
bang guy
Moderator
The law, last time I looked at it, was restricted to foreign workers that have specialized skills not available to employers in the US. The fact that they require training means they do not have the required specialized skills and Disney is violating the law and the intention of the law. Yet these violations are being completely ignored.
2quills
Well-Known Member
I believe the jobs in question were your run of the mill IT tech jobs. My understanding is that the immigrants they brought over from India had the necessary qualifications to do that type of work. My guess is Disney just wanted to familiarize them with the company and the network before they turned the Americans loose. Probably kids fresh out of school or something.
But yeah, my interpretation is that companies are allowed to bring people in on these specialized visas if they have jobs openings that are not able to be filled by Americans. But if they have qualified Americans applying for those jobs then they are obligated to hire them first. In Disney's case they had those positions already filled from what I understand. And as soon as the Immigrants got the gist of the situation they laid of the Americans. I don't know if that's a crime or not but if it isn't then it should be.
Simply because they are willing to work for cheap. I've been around the property management business for a while. I see these students come over here and they'll pack 6 of them into a small apartment or a house. 3 per bedroom with nothing but mattresses on the floor and no furniture in the home to speak of. Most Americans don't aspire to live that way.
geridoc
Well-Known Member
You can't have it both ways. They cannot be exempt from our jurisdiction, but subject to our laws since our laws are the jurisdiction.