• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Author of Arizona immigration law wants to end birthright citizenship

ludahai

Defender of the Faith
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Messages
10,320
Reaction score
2,115
Location
Taichung, Taiwan - 2017 East Asian Games Candidate
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
link

The author of Arizona's immigration law, state Sen. Russell Pearce, told constituents he wants to pass another measure to invalidate citizenship granted to the children of illegal aliens.

Pearce wrote that he plans to "push for an Arizona bill that would refuse to accept or issue a birth certificate that recognizes citizenship to those born to illegal aliens, unless one parent is a citizen," in an email obtained by Phoenix CBS affiliate KPHO.
In this, those supporting a state law to not recognize such birth certificates are going way too far. This is CLEARLY a violation of the U.S. constitution which grants U.S. citizenship to anyone born in the United States.

Don't like this, work to change to Constitution. However, unlike the other two controversial laws (which I support), I can NOT support this proposal. It is blatently unconstitutional.
 

Jetboogieman

Somewhere in Babylon
Dungeon Master
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 12, 2010
Messages
30,810
Reaction score
34,032
Location
Somewhere in Babylon...
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
link



In this, those supporting a state law to not recognize such birth certificates are going way too far. This is CLEARLY a violation of the U.S. constitution which grants U.S. citizenship to anyone born in the United States.

Don't like this, work to change to Constitution. However, unlike the other two controversial laws (which I support), I can NOT support this proposal. It is blatently unconstitutional.
This is indeed a constitutional matter, enough said. However I'm sure some people are bound to come in to cheer in support of this possible state law.
 

hazlnut

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 27, 2009
Messages
11,963
Reaction score
3,543
Location
Naperville, IL
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
link



In this, those supporting a state law to not recognize such birth certificates are going way too far. This is CLEARLY a violation of the U.S. constitution which grants U.S. citizenship to anyone born in the United States.

Don't like this, work to change to Constitution. However, unlike the other two controversial laws (which I support), I can NOT support this proposal. It is blatently unconstitutional.
His first law hasn't been tested yet and he's already going after the babies.

And, some might say, based on his first law, he hasn't really read the U.S. constitution or bill of rights in quite some time.
 

Jetboogieman

Somewhere in Babylon
Dungeon Master
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 12, 2010
Messages
30,810
Reaction score
34,032
Location
Somewhere in Babylon...
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
"With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured, the first thought forbidden, the first freedom denied, chains us all irrevocably. The first time any man's freedom is trodden on, we're all damaged." - Jean Luc Picard
 

Vic Mango

Member
Joined
Aug 27, 2009
Messages
64
Reaction score
8
Location
Florida
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
how retroactive are you willing to make it Russel???????????
 

ludahai

Defender of the Faith
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Messages
10,320
Reaction score
2,115
Location
Taichung, Taiwan - 2017 East Asian Games Candidate
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
His first law hasn't been tested yet and he's already going after the babies.

And, some might say, based on his first law, he hasn't really read the U.S. constitution or bill of rights in quite some time.
Nothing wrong with the first law, it is actually not as broad as existing federal law. However, this new proposal clearly violates the Constitution.
 

hazlnut

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 27, 2009
Messages
11,963
Reaction score
3,543
Location
Naperville, IL
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Nothing wrong with the first law, it is actually not as broad as existing federal law. However, this new proposal clearly violates the Constitution.
The test of the first law is still to come.

Fed Courts won't rule on state laws on paper, once it goes into practice and they have actual cases to review... Then we'll see.
 

The Mark

Sporadic insanity normal.
Supporting Member
Monthly Subscriber
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 9, 2005
Messages
26,020
Reaction score
6,499
Location
Pennsylvania
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
While I dislike the idea (albeit stereotypical) of illegal immigrants intentionally having a child so that it becomes a citizen (thus making one of their family members a citizen of the US, the so-called "anchor baby" bit)...

If those children are put through public school properly, they should become productive citizens...Assuming the public school system functioned properly, which it does not currently (pet issue here).

But yeah, the law is fine as is, although perhaps requiring several months residency (even if illegal) would be an idea.
 

RyrineaHaruno

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 17, 2009
Messages
1,827
Reaction score
409
Location
Humble Texas
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
He need to go read the freaking continuation of America. Am I the only on, that is worried that what Arizona is doing might become reality? I mean come on the birth right is constitutional. The author of this bill needs to go read the continuation of America.
 

Korimyr the Rat

Baby Eating Monster
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 1, 2006
Messages
19,553
Reaction score
15,756
Location
Cheyenne, WY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
The Constitution was amended to say that anyone born within the United States is automatically a US citizen. It can be amended again to say that only those born to US citizens are automatically granted citizenship-- and I think it should be.

Failing that, however, his proposed law is unconstitutional and should not be pursued.
 

ludahai

Defender of the Faith
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Messages
10,320
Reaction score
2,115
Location
Taichung, Taiwan - 2017 East Asian Games Candidate
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
The test of the first law is still to come.

Fed Courts won't rule on state laws on paper, once it goes into practice and they have actual cases to review... Then we'll see.
If the state law is misapplied and racial profiling DOES occur, I expect cases of individual enforcement. However, if the AZ law is unconstitutional, so is existing federal law.
 

Hatuey

Rule of Two
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 17, 2006
Messages
54,199
Reaction score
21,857
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
I hope states like New Hampshire pass this law. All those 'anchor babies' from Asia need to be done away with too.
 
Last edited:

Hatuey

Rule of Two
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 17, 2006
Messages
54,199
Reaction score
21,857
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
huh?!?!? non sequiter?
What? You think Mexicans are the only illegal immigrants? They illegal immigration from Asia is a problem too you know.

ALIPAC - Illegal immigrants from Asia are increasing along the US borders

In a stunning example of history repeating itself, an invasion of Chinese illegal immigrants is underway in the American Southwest and the authorities are doing everything they can to stop it. In the Nogales Sector of Arizona, 78 Chinese nationals were apprehended while trying to enter the US illegally through Mexico in October of this year alone. Between October 2008 and the end of August 2009, the Tucson Sector arrested 261 Chinese nationals according to Patrol Agent Colleen Agle. In the previous year only 30 had been captured. That is an 1100% increase in one year for Arizona. Texas has also seen a major increase in illegal Chinese traffic.
 

ludahai

Defender of the Faith
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Messages
10,320
Reaction score
2,115
Location
Taichung, Taiwan - 2017 East Asian Games Candidate
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative

Awesome!

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 20, 2005
Messages
1,462
Reaction score
260
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
link



In this, those supporting a state law to not recognize such birth certificates are going way too far. This is CLEARLY a violation of the U.S. constitution which grants U.S. citizenship to anyone born in the United States.

Don't like this, work to change to Constitution. However, unlike the other two controversial laws (which I support), I can NOT support this proposal. It is blatently unconstitutional.
We need to be careful here, otherwise we may lose our birthright citizenship rights in Mexico. Mexico can be a mirror to y'know...
 

Hatuey

Rule of Two
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 17, 2006
Messages
54,199
Reaction score
21,857
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
In New Hampshire?!?!?
Why not? What? You think the only state that has illegal immigrants is Arizona?

And, yes I am aware that there are other illegal aliens. I disagree with the proposal in this thread, or did you NOT read the OP?
I did. And my statement is this is exactly what those who supported the other laws deserve. It was only a matter of time before they came up with something like this. If they want to enforce it retroactively? I'm down. I ain't got nothing to worry about.
 

ludahai

Defender of the Faith
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Messages
10,320
Reaction score
2,115
Location
Taichung, Taiwan - 2017 East Asian Games Candidate
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Why not? What? You think the only state that has illegal immigrants is Arizona?
It makes sense to:

1. Apply this to a state with a demonstrable illegal immigration problem. Arizona has this. NH's illegals are very minimal and I doubt there are a significant number of Asian illegals there. Nice strawman, though.

2. It also makes sense to see if the Arizona law is effective before other states enact it. I have also said this previously.

I did. And my statement is this is exactly what those who supported the other laws deserve. It was only a matter of time before they came up with something like this. If they want to enforce it retroactively? I'm down. I ain't got nothing to worry about.
Difference is that the first law is Constitutional and addresses a real problem. The current proposal is clearly UNConstitutional. I know some people have difficulty separating issues for partisan reasons, but these are NOT the same and reasonable people can support one and oppose the other despite what some partisan hacks may say to the contrary.
 

Hatuey

Rule of Two
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 17, 2006
Messages
54,199
Reaction score
21,857
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
It makes sense to:

1. Apply this to a state with a demonstrable illegal immigration problem. Arizona has this. NH's illegals are very minimal and I doubt there are a significant number of Asian illegals there.
How do you know?

Nice strawman, though.
Learn what a strawman is.

2. It also makes sense to see if the Arizona law is effective before other states enact it. I have also said this previously.
Well then you should have no problem with this law. You see no problem with people being stopped and asked for documentation papers simply because they seem like they're not from here. I have no problem with anchor babies being removed with their parents. What are we discussing?

Difference is that the first law is Constitutional and addresses a real problem.
Since when is it up to local police agencies to enforce immigration laws? K thanks Bye!
 

ludahai

Defender of the Faith
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Messages
10,320
Reaction score
2,115
Location
Taichung, Taiwan - 2017 East Asian Games Candidate
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
How do you know?
Do you know anything about NH other than it is one of the most beautiful states on the Eastern seaboard?

Learn what a strawman is.
I know what it is, hence I can detect them when you make them.

Well then you should have no problem with this law. You see no problem with people being stopped and asked for documentation papers simply because they seem like they're not from here. I have no problem with anchor babies being removed with their parents. What are we discussing?
Of course I have a problem with this law. The US CONSTITUTION states that anyone born in the US is a US citizen. That is a bit different than being asked for documentation. Also, the AZ law does NOT empower Law Enforcement Agents to simply stop over people and ask for their documentation papers (though by law they are legally required to possess them), it requires them to stop them for another legal reason first before asking. If you don't have identification, that may be one reason for reasonable suspicion...

As for "anchor babies", they are U.S. citizens. That is NOT the same as requiring documentation from immigants as they are NOT immigrants in the first place.

Since when is it up to local police agencies to enforce immigration laws? K thanks Bye!
They are responsible for upholding the law. The State government is now saying that this now falls under state law. In the absense of action from the federal government, the State has the right to protect its own citizens.
 

Hatuey

Rule of Two
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 17, 2006
Messages
54,199
Reaction score
21,857
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Do you know anything about NH other than it is one of the most beautiful states on the Eastern seaboard?
Still waiting for you to show us how you know.

I know what it is, hence I can detect them when you make them.
Obviously not because at no point did I misinterpret your position.

If I had attributed an argument to you,
Of course I have a problem with this law. The US CONSTITUTION states that anyone born in the US is a US citizen. That is a bit different than being asked for documentation.
The 4th disagrees with you.

FindLaw: U.S. Constitution: Fourth Amendment

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Also, the AZ law does NOT empower Law Enforcement Agents to simply stop over people and ask for their documentation papers (though by law they are legally required to possess them), it requires them to stop them for another legal reason first before asking. If you don't have identification, that may be one reason for reasonable suspicion...
Sowwies. Your broad interpretations and vague wording aren't sufficient.

As for "anchor babies", they are U.S. citizens. That is NOT the same as requiring documentation from immigants as they are NOT immigrants in the first place.
They're the children of people who are here illegally. Their "citizenship" has been obtained by way of an illegal activity and thus invalid.

They are responsible for upholding the law. The State government is now saying that this now falls under state law. In the absense of action from the federal government, the State has the right to protect its own citizens.
If enforcing federal immigration laws falls under the duties of states - I see no reason for this not to.
 

ludahai

Defender of the Faith
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Messages
10,320
Reaction score
2,115
Location
Taichung, Taiwan - 2017 East Asian Games Candidate
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Still waiting for you to show us how you know.
Does NH have a problem with criminal activity of illegals? Do you hear New Hampshireites complaing about problems with illegals? Are there illegals in NH? Sure there are. Are they present in the numbers that they are in AZ? Of course not! Are they causing the law enforcement difficulties that they are in AZ? Of course not. That tells me that the government of NH does not need to take the drastic measures that AZ is. I do NOT believe in a one-size fits all solution to problems because problems are different in different states.

Obviously not because at no point did I misinterpret your position.
You are the master of misinterpretation.


The 4th disagrees with you.
The Fourth Amendment prohibits law enforcement officials from establishing the identity of people it pulls over for a traffic violation or any other suspected and observed violation of the law?!?!? That is new on me.

Sowwies. Your broad interpretations and vague wording aren't sufficient.
The wording in the law is quite specific.

They're the children of people who are here illegally. Their "citizenship" has been obtained by way of an illegal activity and thus invalid.
Perhaps YOU are the one in need of reading the Constitution.

14th Article of Amendment said:
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.
Pretty explicit language.

If enforcing federal immigration laws falls under the duties of states - I see no reason for this not to.
You can't understand the difference between an explicit constitutional provision as the 14th Article of Amendment to the Constitution and the enforcement of a law that has been passed by both the Federal government of the United States and the State government of Arizona.
 

TurtleDude

warrior of the wetlands
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2005
Messages
248,923
Reaction score
74,771
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
This is indeed a constitutional matter, enough said. However I'm sure some people are bound to come in to cheer in support of this possible state law.
The constitution should be amended so that the status of the parents is the status of the child but I agree Arizona cannot unilaterally ignore the 14th amendment etc
 
Top Bottom