HR 1940 is a bill being sponsored by Rep. Nathan Deal, Georgia Republican, which would amend the Immigration & Nationality Act to better define what constitutes “birthright citizenship,” the practice of automatically extending U.S. citizenship to anyone born on American soil.
The bill is designed to curtail the practice of illegal aliens crossing the border for the sole purpose of having a child on U.S. soil and thus establishing a foothold toward legal residency via “birthright citizenship.” Such children are derisively known as “anchor babies.” This practice also sets the stage for the rest of the child’s family to eventually move here legally, a process known a “chain migration.”
Opponents of the practice believe birthright citizenship, established by the 14th Amendment immediately following the Civil War, was never intended to allow “anchor babies” and “chain migration.” They maintain the phrase “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States in the amendment doesn’t apply to aliens who cross the border into the United States illegally for the purpose of having a child, noting that such aliens are subject to the jurisdiction of the home country they left, not the United States. And they certainly have a valid point and argument.
So the Deal legislation would define exactly who is included in the phrase “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States as: (1) a citizen or national of the United States; (2) an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence in the United States whose residence is in the United States; or (3) an alien performing active service in the armed forces.
Such a definition of the phrase would prohibit the benefits of birthright citizenship to “anchor babies” and all but eliminate illegal “chain migration.” However, the bill specifically stipulates that the law change “shall not be construed to affect the citizenship or nationality status of any person born before the date of the enactment of this Act.”
The bill was introduced last April and has been referred to the House Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security, and International Law. It currently has 90 co-sponsors, including Nevada Republican Rep. Dean Heller.
But not Nevada Republican Rep. Jon Porter.
In case this is an issue of importance to you, Congressman Porter’s phone numbers are:
In Washington: (202) 225-3252
In Las Vegas: (702) 387-4941
Posted on September 11th, 2007 by Chuck Muth
Filed under: Nevada
Yes, I’ll be calling him… that’s for sure.
Illegal aliens should not be allowed to come over here and have their babies.
Nurses in the NICU say it’s an epidemic here in LV and California and they wish our lawmakers would do something about it.
You can’t serve two masters. In addition to ending automatic citizenship for anchor babies, we need to eliminate dual citizenship. Part of the US citizenship oath states, “I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen.” How can this phrase of the citizenship oath be reconciled to the concept of dual citizenship?
Quotes from Mexican President Calderon’s recent state of the nation address:
“Mexico does not end at its borders.”
“We strongly protest the unilateral measures taken by the U.S. Congress and government that have only persecuted and exacerbated the mistreatment of Mexican undocumented workers.”
“The insensitivity toward those who support the U.S. economy and society has only served as an impetus to reinforce the battle … for their rights.”
“Where there is a Mexican, there is Mexico.”
I can only interpret these statements as a declaration of war against the US.
I can’t believe Calderon had the nerve to say such things.
Like Glenn Beck says, “He needs to shut his pie hole”.
All I’ve been hearing lately, is that they think this is “their” land and their taking it back … without a single shot.
Our government is letting it happen.. all while us American taxpayers pay for them.
THE BOAT IS FULL FOLKS.
Even Disneyland has a maximum capacity.
Not only did President Calderon make the statements, he received a standing ovation from his audience for them.
I see an error I made…
“they’re” taking it back…. not “their” DOH!
Here you go …
http://www.birthrightpetition.com/?p=5
Here’s part of the response from Jon Porter…..
Dear Terri:
Thank you for contacting me to express your views on H.R. 1940, the Birthright Citizenship Act of 2007. I appreciate hearing from you and having the benefit of your views.
While I understand that this bill is one potential answer to the growing problem of illegal immigrants,
I do not believe it is the proper solution. Please know that I remain committed to finding constitutionally valid solutions that solve the problem of illegal immigration.
BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH
I don’t live in Congressman Porter’s district, and we’re fourteen months from the election, but I think it’s starting to look like a good possibility that in January 2009, the representative from Nevada’s 3rd Congressional District will be Robert Daskas, currently the deputy Clark County DA and a Democrat.
Numbers USA reports that the Senate will consider an amendment (Senate Amendment 2237) to the Defense Bill (HR 1585) that will grant a path to amnesty to illegal aliens who (1) have maintained a continuous presence in the United States for five years and were not yet 16 years old upon initial entry, (2) are of “good moral character” and are not inadmissible or deportable on certain criminal grounds or on the basis of being a risk to national security, and (3) have been admitted to an institution of higher education, have attained a high school diploma, or have obtained a GED in the United States. This amendment is the so-called DREAM Act (Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors Act) and will allow illegal aliens to attend college at the in-state tuition rate (which citizens and legal residents are ineligible for if they go to college in a state other than their state of residence) or go into the military. Upon completion of two years of college or two years of military service, they will qualify for citizenship. Once they become citizens, they will be able to sponsor their parents who are here illegally and who brought them here illegally.
I understand that these kids didn’t voluntarily come to this country, they were brought here by their parents. And I agree that education is important. However, it’s hard to avoid being cynical about our government when our elected officials try to surreptitiously backdoor programs like this thru amendments to unrelated bills (the provision for two years of military service in the amendment hardly qualifies it as defense related). In addition, it’s an outrage that Congress would even consider another amnesty bill so soon after so many Americans made it known that they were adamantly opposed to amnesty.
Besides the amnesty amendment to the Defense Bill, there are reports that pro-amnesty Congressmen and Senators are considering whether to add an amnesty provision for illegal alien farm workers to this year’s Agriculture Bill.
Like Michelle Malkin says:
Amnesty Shamnesty!!!!!
GAH! I’m so sick of our politicians… sneaky @#$%^&*’s.
John .. here you go..
Michelle Malkin has one of the best site’s ever!
http://michellemalkin.com/2007/09/11/shamnesty-alert-the-dream-act-returns/
I’m coming back to my old stomping grounds.. Reno/Sparks next weekend… can’t wait!!!!!
The “Dream Act” would quickly become a nightmare for the American people because it grants immediate, lawful status, puts them on a fast track to citizenship, grants taxpayer benefits, and creates a massive “anchor teen” loophole that puts amnesty within the reach of millions!
This is a bad news bill for the American people who time and time again have told leadership that they DO NOT SUPPORT AMNESTY FOR ILLEGAL ALIENS!
I am urging our Senators to OPPOSE the “Dream Act” or any other legislation that would reward illegal behavior with citizenship-our most precious gift as a nation.
I agree the immigration system must be fixed, but any legislation that rewards wrong-doing is not the answer and therefore cannot be supported.
Listen to the voice of the American people by casting a NO vote on the “Dream Act” amendment to the Defense Appropriations bill.
Today’s Wall Street Journal had an article about the DREAM Act. The focus of the article was the military aspect of the bill. It quickly glossed over the college part of the bill. In keeping with the Journal’s support for open borders, the article emphasized what a great deal the DREAM Act is for the US because it enlarges the applicant pool for our military recruiters.
Ironically, the article says that some Latino groups are opposed to the bill because they think it will allow the US to coerce illegal immigrants into the military to fill the void left by Americans who won’t serve, and that the DREAM Act will be a defacto draft for illegal immigrants.
Hello…Man i love reading your blog, interesting posts ! it was a great Sunday