H.R.1868 - Birthright Citizenship Act of 2009

To amend section 301 of the Immigration and Nationality Act to clarify those classes of individuals born in the United States who are nationals and citizens of the United States at birth. view all titles (2)

All Bill Titles

  • Official: To amend section 301 of the Immigration and Nationality Act to clarify those classes of individuals born in the United States who are nationals and citizens of the United States at birth. as introduced.
  • Short: Birthright Citizenship Act of 2009 as introduced.

This Bill currently has no wiki content. If you would like to create a wiki entry for this bill, please Login, and then select the wiki tab to create it.

Comments Feed

Displaying 1-30 of 140 total comments.

  • donnyshaw 05/29/2009 8:05am

    Here’s the relevant section of the 14th amendment:

    “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.”

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution

  • Comm_reply
    Waytwofast 05/30/2009 8:54am

    For the first time on this website I have had to thumbs down a “Republican” bill. The 14th Amendment is clear on this: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the States wherein they reside.”

    14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution: Ratified: July 9, 1868

    This bill I feel will violate the constitution of the United States. The Constitution did not discriminate on a child or other person due to their parents citizenship status.

    If a child of illegal parents is born here in the United States, than that child is a legal citizen, however what this bill should be doing is eliminating the automatic citizenship status for the parents; as they are not legal citizens, but are parents of a legal resident.

    I believe this bill violated the Constitution, and I hereby stand against it.

  • Comm_reply
    Fyreseer 06/01/2009 2:38am

    Unfortunately, I have to agree that you’re right, that it goes against the 14th amendment. The parents aren’t automatically given legal residency, just are allowed to chain migrate (with other members of the extended family) and become legal residents when the child turns 18. If the parents aren’t legal citizens, should we take the children away and put them in foster care? Should we continue to allow the illegal parents to remain, knowing that they turn to welfare, medicaid, and hospital emergency rooms to have benefits? It’s not an easy problem, and while I wouldn’t mind the children staying, the law-breaking parents have got to go.

  • Comm_reply
    Concern4Constitution 06/15/2009 9:11am

    My opinion is that programs that are paid for by citizens and taxpayers are to be used for the benefit of citizens and taxpayers.

    Is there a way to allow for the citizenship of the child without rewarding the illegal manner in which they received it? Wouldn’t limiting services to legal residents greatly reduce the incentive to enter the country illegally?

  • Comm_reply
    qldaustralia 09/29/2009 11:36am
    Link Reply
    + -3

    Services to legal residents are limited already. People don’t come here for the services because they generally don’t get any.

  • Comm_reply
    qldaustralia 09/29/2009 11:34am

    I have not thought about this issue this way, only that it blatantly violates the 14th amendment (unless you make it do acrobatics). In 2007, over 1 million people became Legal Permanent Residents (http://bit.ly/4u4FyG) & under this legislation their children would be ineligible for citizenship, regardless of how long their parents have lived in the states.

    As far as social welfare benefits, the POWRA made immigrants ineligible for most benefits until they have been in the US for 5 years; an undocumented person is not eligible for most benefits (including TANF, what people usually call welfare).

    Regarding children of undocumented immigrants – should kids be punished for the parents’ decision to enter the US illegally, regardless of whether the parents planned to have kids here or not? Could you really look a child in the face and tell them they don’t deserve food b/c their parents violated civil law? Lord help us as a nation if our citizens could actually do that.

  • Comm_reply

    Filtered Comment [ show ]

  • Comm_reply

    Filtered Comment [ show ]

  • Comm_reply
    Watchemoket 07/14/2010 11:53am

    So you think that an illegal immigrant who commits a crime in the US is not subject to the jurisdiction of the state in which the crime was committed, or to the application of federal laws (i.e., immigration laws) because they are “not the subject of the USA”?
    Any person present in the US is subject to the jurisdiction of the federal and appropriate state and local governments. The word ‘subject’ as used in the 14th Amendment is not a synonym for “citizen” – it means required to obey the laws, etc.

  • Comm_reply
    Teri 06/09/2009 9:21pm

    Way to Fast,

    The bill does not violate the Constitution, it is amending an amendment. (the 14th amendment). Thats what amendments are for, to amend (adjust, change, update, etc) the laws that become outdated. Read history. This amendment was put into place shortly after the civil war in order to protect newly freed slaves, not to allow illegal immigrants to come here to have their children so they become automatic citizens. (If we wanted open borders there would be no need for immigration laws right?) These illegal immigrants have chosen to use out laws against us to their benefit. Why would you want to allow that to continue?

  • Comm_reply
    dcornwall 07/28/2009 4:40pm

    You cannot amend a Constitutional amendment with a statute. You would need to use the process of Constitutional Amendment found at http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/constitution/ to amend or repeal the 14th Amendment. That process states that an amendment can only be “proposed either by the Congress with a two-thirds majority vote in both the House of Representatives and the Senate or by a constitutional convention called for by two-thirds of the State legislatures.” Once it is proposed, the amendment would then have to be ratified by three-fourths of the States (38 of 50 States).

    I’m glad for this process, because this bill would put us in the same camp as Kuwait where there have been multiple generations born in that country w/o gaining citizenship. Many Americans condemned that back in 1990 and it’s not the right thing to do now.

  • Comm_reply
    lwlangway 08/12/2009 1:35pm

    here here. This has been the biggest loophole that has compounded the number of illegal immigrants in this country. There is a high percentage of pregnant women from Mexico that come here illegally just to have their child so they can stay. Look at what’s going on with Calif and some of the other border states.

  • Comm_reply
    qldaustralia 09/29/2009 11:37am

    I’d be interested in seeing your source for this claim.

  • Comm_reply
    jtbull46 11/02/2009 9:05am
    Link Reply
    + -1

    look it up it is all over the palce. Look at anchors away on youtube. It s a cbs report that even talks about roaches ( illegals) coming into the hospital soaking wet because they swam across the river

  • Comm_reply
    KISS 05/31/2010 8:39am

    You obviously have internet skills, so it appears you choose to be stubborn. You can easily find stats on anchor babies and chain migration.

    http://www.fairus.org/site/PageServer?pagename=iic_immigrationissuecenters4608

  • Comm_reply
    qldaustralia 09/29/2009 11:36am

    This bill does not amend the Constitution, it violates the Immigration and Nationality Act (see the title of the bill).

  • Comm_reply
    jtbull46 11/02/2009 9:03am

    Thank God another patriotic american. I agree the 14th amendment was written to protect newly freed slaves it was not meant to be exploited to leach off our country because they are from a hole in the wall. The only way to keep them out is to make is as uncomfortable as possible here. Then there is no reason to come. The illegals act like we owe it to them and they thumb their noses at us. That is in addition to not attempting to learn our language.

    Liberals just want to keep birthright citizenship because they dont want the latino vote to go agaisnt them and they figure the voters will vote liberal.

    I think anyone who supports illegal immigration ( including anchor babies) is a traitor to this country.

  • Comm_reply
    DanKat 12/30/2010 12:50pm

    Exactly – the 14th Amendment is being exploited for illegal immigrants – you know, new Democrat voters.

    Encouraging self-deportation is easy by cutting off freebies, no work at the sake of Americans working, and oh yeah by eliminating automatic citizenship to the illegal offspring of illegal immigrants.

    It does seem to be a traitorous way of thinking. Very anti-American.

  • Comm_reply
    raysmock 07/28/2009 4:32am
    Link Reply
    + 10

    “and subject to the jurisdiction thereof” was added to overcome court decisions such as The Dred Scott Decision and other language in laws denying citizenship to freed slaves born in the US. But children born to individuals in the US who are foreign diplomats or have visitors visas are not citizens because they are not subject to the laws of the US.
    The current interpretation goes back to s court case in the 1890’s whereby a person born in the US to Chinese workers who were not citizens but remained loyal to the Chinese Emperor was refused reentry into the US after his parents returned to China.
    But ask illegals who they are loyal to, The US or their home country. Most would say their home country. Therefore, are they really subject to the jurisdiction. Ask their children. They are loyal to the country of their heritage.
    This bill needs to be passed. It would stop illegal immigration overnight.

  • Comm_reply
    qldaustralia 09/29/2009 11:38am

    I’d be interested in seeing your sources – you seem to be implying that all undocumented immigrants come over here to have babies. Please point me to the research that has shown that.

  • Comm_reply
    jtbull46 11/02/2009 9:07am

    should illegals even be coming here. What would you rather have armed guards shooting them before they get here or this law passed. They are criminal and giving the kid citizenship ends up rewarding the parent for commiting a crime as the kid is eligible for welfare and all that

  • Comm_reply
    MariaNJ 04/29/2010 8:58pm

    Well, I’ve seen it here in New Jersey alot, as well as,hearing it from people. Mostly it’s the Mexicans and Central Americans (Honduras, El Salvador, Colombia…) I live in predominantly spanish community. Also , there have been news articles written about it.

  • Comm_reply
    fishfry001 05/13/2010 7:56pm

    You’re the kind of person that would need a study to prove to you that the moon is full every 28 days… Funny… wait for a study to show what everyone who isn’t brain dead already knows.

  • Comm_reply
    DanKat 12/30/2010 12:53pm

    Really. Just go into an Emergency Room in a major US city. Illegals can go ahead of Citizens who are paying for their own services.

  • Comm_reply
    KISS 05/31/2010 8:44am

    I don’t see where Raysmock implies “all undocumented immigrants come over here to have babies” Trying to put words into someone’s mouth to distract from the point of the argument?

    Read for yourself, a majority of births in CA hospitals are of undocumented mothers. They come to CA to work the farms, maybe come illegally with their bf or husbands, it doesn’t matter. They are here illegally and costing taxpayers billions of dollars.

    http://www.fairus.org/site/PageServer?pagename=iic_immigrationissuecenters4608

  • Comm_reply
    GeneralFault 07/14/2010 3:27pm
    Link Reply
    + -1

    Sorry, but this simply does not pass the logic test. And it is not what the article states (the article singles out a single hospital where 70% of births are to illegal immigrants) .
    The official count of illegal immigrants in CA is around 2.7 million. http://www.dhs.gov/files/statistics/data/
    If you were to assume a 50% female population, that makes around 1.4 million illegal women in CA.
    California has around 600,000 births per year. So those 1.4 million women would need to have approximately 1 birth every 4 years. Even assuming your alarmist point of view, to make those numbers CA citizen women of birthing age (numbering around 11.6 million) http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/06000.html
    could only have one child every 39 years, or only about one child per mother. However CA has nearly 1.9 children per household http://www.census.gov/population/www/socdemo/hh-fam/cps2009.html, your “fact” simply is not possible.

  • Comm_reply
    dihayden29 08/05/2010 2:41pm

    According to this logic, its the same as saying “Hey, Soviet Union and North Korea get 1 child per couple period. Let’s do that in the United States!” Sounds ridiculous doesn’t it?

  • Comm_reply
    MariaNJ 04/29/2010 8:09pm

    You’re absolutely right. Majority of illegal aliens refuse to read and write English , wave their homeland flag and you call that patriotic to their new country? It’s clearly stating they are only here to free load on our services, benefits and monetary gains. They refuse to assimilate with other nationalities but their own. why would i allow my tax money to them? This is unfair and a slap to the constitution.

  • Comm_reply
    dihayden29 08/05/2010 3:27pm
    Link Reply
    + -3

    How about this? You go to France because you love their culture and the people. But then you see they completely ostricize you for the fact you speak English and not French. But you havent been able to pick up the language on your own very well… Seriously, have you tried to learn another language besides English? They reject you for wearing your USA colors or waving the American flag… Then you realize you have no francs (French currency) just American dollars which of course is not accepted to buy a loaf of bread just because you’re hungry. They laugh at you saying in French “What do you expect a freebee because you’re new to this country?!” “Learn French first buddy!”

    Doesn’t this sound familiar to you at all? Wouldn’t this be the same thing “illegals” go thru in this country?

  • Comm_reply
    MariaNJ 04/29/2010 8:41pm
    Link Reply
    + -1

    ahh. i thought foreign diplomats whether american or other nationalities, who given birth in another country are deemed natural citizens – (the child).


Vote on This Bill

71% Users Support Bill

740 in favor / 306 opposed
 

Send Your Rep a Letter

about this bill Support Oppose Tracking
Track with MyOC

Top-Rated Comments