NO MORE ANCHOR BABIES, SAY ARIZONA RESIDENTS

Automatic Citizenship Opposed

by

Paul L. Williams, Ph.D.


Nearly two of three Arizona voters want to deny automatic U.S. citizenship to the babies of illegal immigrants, a survey indicated.

The Rasmussen Reports telephone survey found voters favored a state senator’s proposal not to grant instant citizenship to U.S.-born babies by a 64 percent to 26 percent margin.

Under current U.S. law, any child born in the United States to an illegal immigrant is automatically a U.S. citizen.

Russell Pearce, a Republican state senator, plans to introduce a bill that would deny birth certificates to children born to illegal immigrants.

“I intend to push for an Arizona bill that would refuse to accept or issue a birth certificate that recognizes citizenship to those born to illegal aliens, unless one parent is a citizen,” Senator Pearce wrote in an e-mail to his constituents.

Republicans and Democrats differed in their views, with 84 percent of Republicans saying the children of illegal immigrants born in the United States should not become citizens and Democratic voters split nearly evenly.

The poll also gauged opinion on Arizona’s controversial new immigration law with two-thirds of the respondents in favor of the measure and a scant 24 percent opposed.

The law, which was signed April 23 by Republican Gov. Jan Brewer and takes effect July 29, makes it a state crime to be in the country illegally. It stipulates a law enforcement officer making a stop or during detention or arrest can request proof of citizenship if the officer has “reasonable suspicion” a person is in the country illegally.

The Obama administration has filed a lawsuit to block the enactment of the Arizona law, arguing that it will “cause the detention and harassment of authorized visitors, immigrants and citizens who do not have or carry identification documents” while altogether ignoring “humanitarian concerns” and harming diplomatic relations.

The Rasmussen results are based on 500 responses to the June 29 survey, which has a margin of error of 4.5 percentage points.

The legal basis for birthright citizenships derives from the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Although the original intent of the 14th Amendment was to give former slaves citizenship after the Civil War including the right to due process, the Amendment has gone on to have far-reaching implications beyond the intent of the writers. The specific part that is being used to justify birthright citizenship comes from Section 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment which states, “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.”

The question facing Arizona legislator is whether illegal aliens are “subject to the jurisdiction thereof.” Illegal aliens do not have the right to vote in federal elections, do not have to register for the draft, and do not pay taxes, unlike American citizens, because they are foreign nationals living within the borders of the United States.

Supporters of birthright citizenship claim that the phrase “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States has no real meaning and is just another way of saying “born in the United States.” For illegal alien supporters, they believe the Fourteenth Amendment requires that any child born on U.S. soil be granted U.S. citizenship.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Illegal Immigration and tagged , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

6 Responses to NO MORE ANCHOR BABIES, SAY ARIZONA RESIDENTS

  1. AmericatheBrave says:

    The whole idea of Anchor babies is a scam! America needs to get smart and grow a pair.

  2. Jack Sperrow says:

    ”This article has multiple issues. Please help improve the article or discuss these issues on the talk page.

    This biography of a living person needs additional references or sources for verification. Tagged since July 2009.
    It needs sources or references that appear in third-party publications. Tagged since July 2009.
    Its neutrality is disputed. Tagged since July 2009.”

    That is exactly what you are going to see on the top of the Wikipedia page when you type in Paul L. William…

    If he really is what he claims to be, why can’t he just show any references from universities he claimed to have a PhD from?!

    Hope you guys got the message….Don’t sell your ears to someone who can’t even verify his identity.

  3. Jack Sperrow says:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_L._Williams

    Take a look at the above link and tell me what do you think when you read the ”lawsuit” section of the wikipedia article about him…isn’t that funny? May be he is making this whole web thing just to distract people from what he really is???

  4. AmericatheBrave says:

    Mr. Jack Sperrow;
    I can tell you that I think you are incredibly funny and unimaginative to use a character in a movie’s name and that your post is old news. Anyone that matters knows about Dr. William’s lawsuit.
    Not a big deal, comes with the territory of being a writer of 6 books. One of which exposed the Catholic Church.
    Do you not want to know the truth? Ha, don’t think your government is telling you the truth.

  5. AmericatheBrave says:

    By the way if Dr. Williams had something to hide he probably would have yanked and censored your sillyness. But in the spirit of freedom of speech he is allowing your nonsense. Dr. Williams is a bigger man than I, as I would have yanked your biased post.

    Frankly, I think he should keep it because it shows just how shallow the gene pool is becoming in the world. You expose your own ignorance.

  6. Victoria Lopez says:

    We know who he really is
    Do you know WHO you really are?

    Dr. Paul L. Williams is an American author, journalist, and consultant, and, for over a decade, has taught philosophy, religion, and the humanities as an adjunct professor at The University of Scranton and Wilkes University.

    Paul came to international prominence in early June, 2006, as a result of his central involvement as an investigator the month prior into the suspicious activities of members of the faculty of McMaster University in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. These investigations, paired with investigations being conducted by Ontario police eventually led to the arrests of 17 terrorist suspects by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP).

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s