November 06, 2006
NOTE: PLEASE say if you DON'T want your name and/or
email address published when sending VDARE email.
11/05/06
- A Reader Questions Deportation Of Unpopular
Anti-Communist Alien
A Pennsylvania Reader Says That
“Anchor Babies” Are NOT U.S. Citizens!
A Pennsylvania Reader writes:
In an October 3, 2006 article on
LewRockwell.com ("Rethinking
Birthright Citizenship"), Representative
Ron Paul (R-TX) implies that a baby born in the U.S.
to parents who are citizens of another country is a U.S.
citizen because the 14th Amendment says so.
Representative Paul then argues that such birthright
citizenship is unwise and legislation to amend the
Constitution is needed to correct this situation.
An examination of the
wording of the 14th Amendment and of the statements
of legislators who passed the amendment shows clearly
that such a baby is explicitly NOT granted U.S.
citizenship. The sooner the President informs all
"anchor babies" born since ratification of the
Amendment in 1868, their relatives and descendents that,
due to an egregious lack of executive and congressional
oversight, federal government agencies mistakenly (and
illegally) granted them U.S. citizenship, the sooner the
Supreme Court can resolve the inevitable lawsuit. Will
Republicans force the issue in this (or any) election
cycle?
VDARE.COM
NOTE: See
Weigh Anchor! Enforce the Citizenship Clause,
for the full story on the 14th Amendment. Our story
quotes
Senator Edgar Cowan of Pennsylvania,
who said, before passing the 14th
Amendment, that
It is perfectly clear that the
mere fact that a man is born in the country has not
heretofore entitled him to the right to exercise
political power. … I have supposed … that it was
essential to the existence of society itself, and
particularly essential to the existence of a free State,
that it should have the power, not only of declaring who
should exercise political power within its boundaries,
but that if it were
overrun by another and
a different race, it would have the right to absolutely
expel them.
