There was a law pending ,but never passed that stated in order for a baby to be a U.S. citizen one of the pare?
U.S. citizen, one of the parents must already be one.Would you support legislation to stop people from coming here just to deliver a baby , to use the United States?
- RETUSAF95Lv 59 years agoFavorite Answer
Legislation would do the trick, read the words, The 14th amendment also grants Congress the power to enforce and define the provisions of the amendment.
"The Fourteenth Amendment extends citizenship to all persons born in the U.S. and "subject to the jurisdiction"; it also grants Congress the power to enforce and define the provisions of the amendment.
Since the Civil Rights Act of 1866, Congress has defined Birthright Citizenship through appropriate legislation, which for decades has granted citizenship to newborns with both parents illegal aliens, foreign tourists or temporary foreign workers and students. The Fourteenth Amendment gives Congress the right to define birthright citizenship differently.
The Birthright Citizenship Act of 2011 would add to the existing federal code a provision that requires at least one parent of a new born to be a U.S. citizen or legal permanent resident in order for the new born to receive automatic citizenship."
"In short, the Constitution of the United States does not grant citizenship at birth to just anyone who happens to be born within American borders. Allegiance, or complete jurisdiction, of the child’s birth parents at the time of birth is an integral part of whether or not that child is an American citizen."
"Supreme Court decisions
The correct interpretation of the 14th Amendment is that an illegal alien mother is subject to the jurisdiction of her native country, as is her baby.
Over a century ago, the Supreme Court appropriately confirmed this restricted interpretation of citizenship in the so-called "Slaughter-House cases" [83 US 36 (1873) and 112 US 94 (1884)]13. In the 1884 Elk v.Wilkins case12, the phrase "subject to its jurisdiction" was interpreted to exclude "children of ministers, consuls, and citizens of foreign states born within the United States." In Elk, the American Indian claimant was considered not an American citizen because the law required him to be "not merely subject in some respect or degree to the jurisdiction of the United States, but completely subject to their political jurisdiction and owing them direct and immediate allegiance."
The Court essentially stated that the status of the parents determines the citizenship of the child. To qualify children for birthright citizenship, based on the 14th Amendment, parents must owe "direct and immediate allegiance" to the U.S. and be "completely subject" to its jurisdiction. In other words, they must be United States citizens.
Congress subsequently passed a special act to grant full citizenship to American Indians, who were not citizens even through they were born within the borders of the United States. The Citizens Act of 1924, codified in 8USCSß1401, provides that:
The following shall be nationals and citizens of the United States at birth:
(a) a person born in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof;
(b) a person born in the United States to a member of an Indian, Eskimo, Aleutian, or other aboriginal tribe."Source(s): http://www.numbersusa.com/content/news/june-7-2011... http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/4... http://www.14thamendment.us/birthright_citizenship...
- Yak RiderLv 79 years ago
No, and it's not clear legislation would do the trick. The Supreme Court has interpreted the 14th Amendment to mean children born in the USA are US citizens. It will most likely take a Constitutional Amendment or the Supreme Court reversing itself to change things.