What type of citizenship criteria should the US use?

[Lursa]

Please explain your answer...your reasoning, the pros and cons, the benefits and consequences, etc.

We have a legal process for changing the definition in the 14th Amendment...so should we do so? Why not have a national discussion and see what's best for the US? Please start discussing it here.

I am open to changing it to having one parent being a US citizen but would like to know more to see if that would be better.

Please do not rehash the discussions in other threads on the current text of the 14th. It can be changed...the question is...should it be?

 

[Callen]

I have no opinion on the criteria the US should use but my criteria for Canada is one, or both parents, must have legal resident status in Canada.

 

[SkyChief]

Both parents are US citizens (natural born or naturalized) and born anywhere in the world

This would discourage "anchor baby"/birthright tourism.

 

[Lursa]

Both parents are US citizens (natural born or naturalized) and born anywhere in the world

This would discourage anchor baby/birthright tourism.

Why wouldnt one parent being a citizen do so?

 

[Ahlevah]

I still remember the “Amerasian” kids in Vietnam, a legacy of the war who were stigmatized by the locals. I can’t forget them and how Congress changed the law to bestow upon them U.S. citizenship, because it saw it as an injustice. These kids existed because we sent their fathers there. We threw their country to the communist wolves, but we weren’t completely heartless. We didn’t abandon them.

 

[Ahlevah]

Both parents are US citizens (natural born or naturalized) and born anywhere in the world

This would discourage "anchor baby"/birthright tourism.

So you would have been against giving citizenship to the children of U.S. soldiers in Vietnam, correct? We make the mess, but it’s up to someone else to clean it up, right?

 

[SkyChief]

So you would have been against giving citizenship to the children of U.S. soldiers in Vietnam, correct?

WHAT??? U.S. Soldiers in Vietnam??

We make the mess, but it’s up to someone else to clean it up, right?

"The mess"? WTF are you talking about?

oh dear.

 

[What if...?]

You forgot the oath of fealty to King trump!

 

[Ahlevah]

WHAT??? LOL

Amerasians—the children of American servicemen in Vietnam. You need to educate yourself on one of the legacies of our participation in the war there.

Mess? WTF are you talking about?

oh dear.

I’m talking about the kids who were fathered by American soldiers in Vietnam and then abandoned there—even by their mothers in many cases because they were considered social outcasts. A Ranger, for example, never leaves a brother. But a “bui doi” (dust for life) “half-breed, bastard” child he fathered with a prostitute working at a brothel in Saigon is another story, or what I would call a “mess” that someone else was expected to clean up.

 

[George50]

Leave it as is. Changing it does nothing to help our country and just hurts the child who did nothing wrong.

 

[Helix]

Keep the 14th as is. Restore the self executing exclusion clause.

 

[SkyChief]

Amerasians—the children of American servicemen in Vietnam. You need to educate yourself on one of the legacies of our participation in the war there.

You need to educate yourself about the mistake of using logical fallacies as support for an argument. When a person uses logical fallacies to support their argument - they have effectively forfeited the argument.

I’m talking about the kids who were fathered by American soldiers in Vietnam and then abandoned there—even by their mothers in many cases because they were considered social outcasts.

Those faults are with the mother and father - not with the U.S. immigration policy.

A Ranger, for example, never leaves a brother. But a “bui doi” (dust for life) “half-breed, bastard” child he fathered with a prostitute working at a brothel in Saigon is another story, or what I would call a “mess” that someone else was expected to clean up.

OK.

 

[Peter]

Just use a simple question.

Do you think Trump is a living God?
If someone says No then ship them out to the nastiest place you can find.

 

[Ahlevah]

You need to educate yourself about the mistake of using logical fallacies as support for an argument. When a person uses logical fallacies to support their argument - they have effectively forfeited the argument.

So **** ‘em? Is that about the size of it? We don’t abandon our war buddies, but our kids are okay. Gotcha.

Those faults are with the mother and father - not with the U.S. immigration policy.

OK.

Our country sent them over there. We needed to own it if the soldiers weren’t going to, which apparently they weren’t in many cases.

 

[Felis Leo]

Every baby born on our soil should be a made a citizen of our nation upon drawing their first breath.

 

[WorldWatcher]

Other...

Jus Soli (Birth by Soil)

Jus Sanguinis (Birth by Blood)

Jus Soli would apply to anyone that is a citizen (either parent) or individuals that are here on legally on a visa authorization of 90 days or more. If present illegally or for a very short period of time (tourist visa), there would not be citizenship awarded under jus soli.

Jus Sanguinis would apply to a baby born to any US Citizen anywhere in the world. If born in a country outside a US medical system, then application for citizenship would be through the Department of State as it is now.

Hospitals and other medical professionals would be able to issue temporary birth certificates at birth, final birth certificates would only be issued once confirmation was received as to the status of the parent(s) and would show citizenship status (sort of a Real ID birth certificate).

Remember the question from the OP isn't "what is..." it is - IYHO - "what should be...".

WW

 

[Individual]

I would go with a newborn regardless of place of birth entitled to citizenship of the Mother.
If the Mother becomes naturalized while the child has yet become an adult, the child to would become naturalized, and have dual citizenship. If, for some reason, the Mother is deported Her child could remain with Her. If the Father is a U.S. citizen, the child would also be a U.S. citizen, and if the Mother is deported, the Courts would decide custody of the child.
I would also require requests for asylum or permanent residency, by law require one enter at a port of entry where they would be documented and provided with evidence of legal entry without which they would have no recourse other than to be deported.

 

[stealthycat]

it was never the intent of birthright citizenship for Russia to human traffic tens of thousands of women and for $30,000 they can get to the USA in their 3rd trimester and have their baby on USA soil and boom !! Anchor baby

never the intent

 

[daeler]

I think if it gets amended we could switch to a "from this point on" stance of at least one parent being born in America and the child is born here with a provision of fast tracking those born outside of America for citizenship.

 

[WorldWatcher]

I think if it gets amended we could switch to a "from this point on" stance of at least one parent being born in America and the child is born here with a provision of fast tracking those born outside of America for citizenship.

Why would there need to be any "fast tracking" of a child born to someone in the Military (or State Department) stationed outside the US like Japan?

WW

 

[Callen]

I think if it gets amended we could switch to a "from this point on" stance of at least one parent being born in America and the child is born here with a provision of fast tracking those born outside of America for citizenship.

I doubt it would ever be the law that one parent must be born in the States but maybe that one parent must be a citizen.

 

[daeler]

Why would there need to be any "fast tracking" of a child born to someone in the Military (or State Department) stationed outside the US like Japan?

WW

Legalities can cause some issues, the child is normally a citizen of the nation they are born in, if a divorce happens there can be issues.

I imagine there are also security concerns.

Just as an outside comment, I highly doubt we will see any amendments.

I doubt it would ever be the law that one parent must be born in the States but maybe that one parent must be a citizen.

Maybe, lawmakers are so capricious it is difficult to get a handle on where things will fall.

I just went with my most favored outcome, if it ever changes I am probably good with anything as long as it is definitive.

 

[Lethargic Aptitude]

Please explain your answer...your reasoning, the pros and cons, the benefits and consequences, etc.

We have a legal process for changing the definition in the 14th Amendment...so should we do so? Why not have a national discussion and see what's best for the US? Please start discussing it here.

I am open to changing it to having one parent being a US citizen but would like to know more to see if that would be better.

Please do not rehash the discussions in other threads on the current text of the 14th. It can be changed...the question is...should it be?

This is pointless until we regain our country.

 

[WorldWatcher]

Legalities can cause some issues, the child is normally a citizen of the nation they are born in,...

Children of US Citizens are already citizen no matter where they are born under jus sanguinis.

The birth just needs to be documented through the US Embassy.

US Citizen children born outside the US are not considered "naturalized" citizens. Which is why McCain an Cruz could run for President.

WW

 

[daeler]

Children of US Citizens are already citizen no matter where they are born under jus sanguinis.

The birth just needs to be documented through the US Embassy.

US Citizen children born outside the US are not considered "naturalized" citizens. Which is why McCain an Cruz could run for President.

WW

Sure, the discussion is asking what you would want it changed to. While I don't really have any issues with the current setup I think it could be updated.