2009-05-30T15:36:37Z opencongress.org tag:opencongress.org,2007:/bill/comments/56605 2009-05-30T15:36:37Z tag:opencongress.org,2009-05-30:/comment/108417 spoopryme Fury24, im not trying to start a fight here, but if a childs parents do something illigal, and the parents are sent away to prison for many years, the child is also being punished for what the parents did. alphaomega, i agree with you. there is a system in place to alter ammendments to the constitution, and if something like this passes it will only open the door to more, similar abuses. however, labelling people who try and circumvent the system communists is a tad confrontational, as nazi socialists or just downright liars and thieves could do something similar without being communist... 2010-05-07T22:08:04Z tag:opencongress.org,2010-05-07:/comment/196084 ControlFreaks Good Day Congressman Hunter, There should be an amendment to H.R. 1868, to state, that this bill will become retroactive to Jan. 01, 2000. If laws can be made retro for criminal activity, then retro can also apply here. If everyone is so worried about deporting the parents of an Anchor Baby, then make the law retroactive and send the child with them. The Illegal parents, just like Barack Obama (Referring to his father), were not and are not under the jurisdictional rule of the United States at the time of their child's birth, and they hold their allegiance to their native country, so no child born in this country of Illegal parents should be recognized as an American citizen. If the Illegals come here and have children, then their children should not be recognized as Americans, because if they had been following the law and not entered the country Illegally, then they would not have been here at the time of their child's birth. 2010-03-20T14:10:55Z tag:opencongress.org,2010-03-20:/comment/189515 kys9036 I don't feel good about parents come from diffeent countries and born children in U.S. It just not right. 2010-07-07T03:17:44Z tag:opencongress.org,2010-07-07:/comment/203514 pramsey "Comprehensive Immigration Reform" is a code phrase for "Amnesty for all" 2010-08-14T07:26:47Z tag:opencongress.org,2010-08-14:/comment/209470 rangerbrig This bill is NOT an amendment to the Constitution it does not change the language of the 14th amendment it only clarifies it. Which is a shame because the words "and subject to the jurisdiction thereof" seem pretty clear to me. It is also clear to me that the original intent of the writers of the 14th amendment WAS NOT to allow a loophole to citizenship. 2009-10-12T08:25:29Z tag:opencongress.org,2009-10-12:/comment/140443 roxrunner First of all, I really don't think this Bill, approved or not, would have any teeth in it for enactment, because a constitutional amendment contradicts it. The 14th amendment is pretty straightforward, ANY PERSON born here is a citizen. If you want to change that, you need another amendment. Next, to those that would make the sweeping argument that illegals come here to take benefits and jobs that do not belong to them, I urge you to do research and find out who these people are. The majority come here to work and work hard they do. The majority of them do pay into our tax, welfare and retirement system without a hope of being able to take out. They are here to fill a gap in our economy that U.S. citizens will not fill for the pay the undocumented will accept. 2010-08-14T07:27:17Z tag:opencongress.org,2010-08-14:/comment/209471 rangerbrig *** In 1866, Senator Jacob Howard clearly spelled out the intent of the 14th Amendment by stating: "Every person born within the limits of the United States, and subject to their jurisdiction, is by virtue of natural law and national law a citizen of the United States. This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the Government of the United States, but will include every other class of persons. It settles the great question of citizenship and removes all doubt as to what persons are or are not citizens of the United States. This has long been a great desideratum in the jurisprudence and legislation of this country." *** - from http://www.14thamendment.us/birthright_citizenship/original_intent.html 2009-06-09T21:55:43Z tag:opencongress.org,2009-06-09:/comment/109271 Teri Dont you think your comments are a bit over the top? 2010-05-21T15:48:59Z tag:opencongress.org,2010-05-21:/comment/197133 bblouse The key word in all of this is ILLEGAL. They are here illegally, against the law for those who don't know the meaning of the word, and neither they or their offspring have a right to citizenship or benefits of such. If that violates the 14th ammendment, THEN CHANGE IT! If "We the people" put it there, then "We the people" can take it away. 2009-05-31T13:52:07Z tag:opencongress.org,2009-05-31:/comment/108484 AlphaOmega 14th Amendment says, “No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities…” Now the 14th Amendment is a RIGHT listed in the BILL OF RIGHTS that contains the wording of “PRIVLAGE” and “IMMUNITY.” You might think this is trivial but it is a grand flaw since all men are created equal so there are no privileges to abridge. From the moment we are born we are Citizens of the State we are born in and all of us then have UNALIENABLE RIGHTS. Do you see how the 14th Amendment is flawed in every possible way and I’m only addressing the 1st section? The 14th Amendment declares that anyone born in the US is a SUBJECT of the same. This bill will not pass but will attempt to convince the SUBJECTS that Congress is worth their pay. Why would they want to lose millions of those new subjects that vote in those RULERS? All SUBJECTS are slaves of whoever the RULERS are; you must read the 14th and think about it. Then read the Communist Manifesto. 2009-06-01T02:34:11Z tag:opencongress.org,2009-06-01:/comment/108515 Fyreseer Actually, you're taking the word subject out of context. That's one of the issues with English (and one of its beauties, too) - that moving a word to a slightly different place creates an entirely new meaning. The amendment says "subject to the jurisdiction", not that the person is a subject of the state. It means that the person is accountable to the laws and judges of the US. (Which we all know are half wacko at this point.) It is not implying that we are subjects of the US, just that we are subject to the laws of it. I think we should treat an alteration to this amendment with an amendment (a la "Prohibition"), because the people of the US need to decide on this. But we need to decide with our eyes open and FULLY aware of the consequences, and we need to do it BY HAND rather than with the corruptible electronic voting machines. 2009-06-01T10:07:09Z tag:opencongress.org,2009-06-01:/comment/108587 AlphaOmega Actually, the amendment reads, "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." That means that if you were born in the United States you are a subject of the United States. So, prior to the 14th Amendment what were you when you were born, actually? The 14th Amendment is not even a proper Amendment but do as you will. I wonder if you realized that the 14th goes by the name of the Red Amendment. There are books and sites about "The Red Amendment" look them up on a search. Now you get into defining those that are subjected or subjects. It has only one meaning being, "likely to be affected by." When a KING passes an edict you are his SUBJECT just as you are subject to US authority thanks to the 14th Amendment. 2009-06-02T14:01:17Z tag:opencongress.org,2009-06-02:/comment/108720 chrisso This bill is a great effort to stop people from abusing the system. It's such a great feeling going to the the market and seeing illegal aliens with American children filling up grocery carts full of food and then handing the cashier a WIC card. I remember when I could afford to purchase that much food. I guess those were the "good-old" days. I really can't understand how my fellow Americans can support people who are hurting decent, hard-working Americans? I have lost jobs due illegal aliens. I pay a ton of taxes due to illegal aliens. My hospitals are closing due to illegal aliens. My schools are overcrowded due to illegal aliens. By the time many of the American supporters of illegal aliens realize that it has hurt your family, it will be too late to correct. 2010-07-14T12:14:09Z tag:opencongress.org,2010-07-14:/comment/205251 Watchemoket How can you be so blindly ignorant? The phrase is "subject TO the jurisdiction thereof" not "subject OF the jurisdiction thereof" (which would be grammatically incorrect anyway). If you think that only citizens are subject to the jurisdiction of the USA or its states, then you must also think that illegals can't be prosecuted for violating our laws. PLEASE take a remedial English course! 2009-06-01T09:48:41Z tag:opencongress.org,2009-06-01:/comment/108584 yvikrant This bill should be passed such that the law is applicable retroactively going back to Christopher Columbus, who was the first illegal immigrant. Citizenship must be cancelled retrocatively to all descendants of illegal immigrants dating back to Christopher Columbus, even if the descendants are born in America. 2009-06-03T10:24:45Z tag:opencongress.org,2009-06-03:/comment/108786 kjTX This bill is a nice ploy to slide something in under the radar on all of us DUMB Americans. I don't suppose anyone noticed the second sentence of this rediculous bill, did they? Here it is... "Current U.S. law automatically recognizes any person born on American soil as natural born citizen." HELLO? Since when?? I haven't seen any law that would dictate "natural born" citizen status. Just "CITIZEN". And yes, there IS a difference. In order to be a NATURAL BORN citizen, BOTH of your parents have to be US citizens, either by birth or naturalization. PERIOD. No other way to be a "natural born" citizen. Nice try Congress! Go back to high school civics class! 2009-06-03T11:54:03Z tag:opencongress.org,2009-06-03:/comment/108797 burke524 The 14th Amendment does not say that children born of illegal aliens are considered Citizens of the United States. The left says the Constitution is a living document. I do not agree with that but it is open for debate. We still do not know if the current leader of the not so free anymore world, is legally eligible to be the President for sure. All we know is what they have told us... 2009-06-03T16:17:47Z tag:opencongress.org,2009-06-03:/comment/108840 battle OpenCongress Summary: "Current U.S. law automatically recognizes any person born on American soil as natural born citizen" That's grossly INcorrect. It reflects poorly on you, OpenCongress. Title 8, Section 1401 of the U.S. Code defines a national and citizen of the United States "at birth". This legal definition does NOT include the phrase "natural born." * a person born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof; .... http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/8/1401.html Natural-born citizen must mean one who is a citizen by no act of law. If a person owes their citizenship to some act of law, they cannot be considered a natural-born citizen. Children of American parentage, wherever born, are within the constitutional designation, "natural-born citizens": that is, their American citizenship is natural -- the result of parentage -- and is not artificial or acquired by compliance with legislative requirements. 2009-06-15T15:41:20Z tag:opencongress.org,2009-06-15:/comment/109787 Teekno This bill is pointless. Birthright citizenship is guaranteed by the 14th Amendment, and this bill is not a constitutional amendment. It's just going to be overturned. This isn't law, it's a platform for people to look like they're trying to do something about the issue when they know they can't. 2009-07-27T19:52:11Z tag:opencongress.org,2009-07-27:/comment/115623 apache01 One thing of important note here Jasker, we aren't discussing how things are done over in Germany. This is the US, and we have had immigration laws and guidelines on the books for decades now. These people slap every US legal citizen, and our laws, in the proverbial face by coming here illegaly and intentionally breaking our Federal Laws on the matter. Those going thru the proper channels, as did their parents, and their grandparents, and even their great grandparents, who ALL came here by the guidelines, and legally, should all be outraged and insulted by those who willingly break and mock our laws. If they aren't willing to abide by our laws upon entering this country, why should anyone believe they will abide by our laws after they get here? They WON'T!!! How other countries do things is irrelavent to this issue entirely. Other countries, do not have the same Constitution, nor same laws and regulations that we do.