Kishore asked in Politics & GovernmentPolitics · 5 years ago

Why are Republicans against birthright citizenship?

15 Answers

Relevance
  • 5 years ago
    Favorite Answer

    Most Republicans aren't. Birthright citizenship has been a tradition in America since the founding of Jamestown in 1608. It is implied in the original constitution and the 14th amendment was enacted to insure it would be applied to everyone, regardless of race, nationality, or previous condition of servitude. The Supreme Court held it to supersede any immigration law in US. v. Won Kim Ark (1898)

    In 2007 GW Bush pleaded with Congress to pass the bi-partisan Kennedy-McCain Act, But there are a few racist xenophobes who oppose any immigration reform, mostly because they hate Hispanics. Except perhaps for Cuban refugees, who usually vote for conservatives. These right wing radical Tea Partiers oppose the Constitution and the American way, and have attempted to hijack the GOP.

    • ...Show all comments
    • Whatever4
      Lv 7
      5 years agoReport

      So someone from Country X comes to Country Y and has a child born in Country Y. The laws of Country Y govern if the child is a citizen of Y, and the laws of Country X determine if the child is a citizen of X. That's where dual citizenship comes from.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • Anonymous
    5 years ago

    Because it's a vulnerability that illegals use to capitalize on tax payer resources.

    Example/Analogy:

    Say you own a home, and have a family. Say the family you have is entitled to live in the house you own. You can kick out strangers all you want. Then one day, a pregnant person runs into your house, locks herself in the restroom and gives birth to a baby.

    Now, that baby has a legal right to stay in your house. You have no say, you can't reject it, sure it's your home but too bad, the law is the law.

    That's the birthright citizenship in a nut shell. The analogy hits close to home for many, because they begin to understand it on a personal level rather than the hypothetical one in which they realistically see nothing of in person.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • mokrie
    Lv 7
    5 years ago

    When the law was originally written it was meant to be taken from an old English rule that at least the father had to already be a citizen for the child to be one automatically. Not that anyone can sneak in and drop a baby in order for the illegal family to STAY. The baby may be a citizen but since the parents are not they should have to take the baby and go. When the child is 18 he could return on his own or the parents could apply for citizenship like evey one else has to.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 5 years ago

    Illegal immigration has been a phony Republican campaign issue for decades. The Republican Party has a whole box of fake issues that they trot out in campaigns and then promptly forget about after the election. Then they bring them out again for the next campaign and Republican voters never seem to notice!

    Republican candidates are able to get away with making promises they have absolutely no intention of keeping. This is why nobody ever asks them 'How are you going to do that?' In 2012, Mitt Romney said (many times!) that if Obama was president, Iran would get nuclear weapons, but if he was president they wouldn't. Nobody asked him 'So how are you going to prevent them?' Because nobody took him seriously!

    So Trump talks about ending birthright citizenship. He knows that it's something he couldn't do. But he also knows that nobody's going to challenge him on it. If by some sadistic quirk of fate Trump became president, the idea would be totally forgotten, or else he'd mention it in a SOTU and then blame Democrats for 'obstructing'. Republicans LOVE 'wishful thinking'!

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • 5 years ago

    - no other country on Earth has "birthright citizenship/

    - is not constitutional. 14th amendment was intended for slaves.

    - makes no sense. Why does being born here make you special? There's a long line of families waiting to get over here legally, let's take them in, instead of some anchor baby with a family that crossed illegaly

    - im not a republican, i'm a socialist

    • wendy c
      Lv 7
      5 years agoReport

      *not constitutional* best laugh of the night. You really have no clue how this stuff works, do you?

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 5 years ago

    An unexpected result of this, not foreseen by the drafters of the 14th Amendment, was that illegal aliens could enter the country and give birth to US citizens. It also allows for foreign national pregnant women, often from China, who have no intention of becoming US citizens themselves, all for the sole purpose of giving birth to a US citizen they can then take back home. All this was NOT the intent for birthright citizenship.

    The purpose of the 14th Amendment Section 1 was for it give former slaves, who were born in the US, the citizenship that was rightfully theirs. Back then, if one was a citizen of a state one was then a US citizen. Former slave states were denying citizenship to former slaves thus US citizenship. 14 took care of that problem.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • Anonymous
    5 years ago

    If you checked with most Progressives, they are against birthright citizenship too. We are one of the only industrialized countries that allow it.

    Nothing against dreamers, but I do wish you would go to Mexico or wherever too.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 5 years ago

    The fourteenth amendment was one of the reconstruction amendments passed after the civil war. It was intended to grant citizenship to slaves and their descendants.

    It was never intended to grant citizenship to every baby an illegal squirts out while visiting.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • Anonymous
    5 years ago

    most other industrialized nations abolished their birthright citizenship laws.

    basically the idea that someone illegally enter the country, and have a kid then the kid is a citizen makes no sense.

    EDIT-and yes i have plenty against "dreamers".

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 5 years ago

    Because they are looking at demographics that mean they'll be in a minority in 20 years.

    • Login to reply the answers
Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.