What are your thoughts on amending the US Constitution in order to allow naturalized US citizens to become US President?

[SpaceOrbis]

Which is one of the dumbest misinterpretations of law that's come out of the Supreme Court.

Frankly, we need to get rid of that law. You should NOT become a citizen simply b/c you were born in the US.

I disagree. I don't see any sound reason why a baby born in US airspace or on US land shouldn't be a citizen of the United States by place of their birth. If the child was born in International air space in international waters then the child should be a citizen of the mother country. So if the mother is from England the child would be a citizen of England.

If being born in the United States doesn't make one a citizen then what does? Unless you're a native you had to come here from some other place.

 

[Bacle]

I disagree. I don't see any sound reason why a baby born in US airspace or on US land shouldn't be a citizen of the United States by place of their birth. If the child was born in International air space in international waters then the child should be a citizen of the mother country. So if the mother is from England the child would be a citizen of England.

If being born in the United States doesn't make one a citizen then what does? Unless you're a native you had to come here from some other place.

'Birth tourism', where neither parent is a citizen, and they come to the US just before the expected due date to get them US citizenship later in life, or as an 'anchor baby' to try to over stay their welcome, is very much a thing.

CBP has to deal with that stuff as part of their customs duties at international airports, and turns away people who try it as part of their screening duties.

 

[SpaceOrbis]

'Birth tourism', where neither parent is a citizen, and they come to the US just before the expected due date to get them US citizenship later in life, or as an 'anchor baby' to try to overstay their welcome, is very much a thing.

CBP has to deal with that stuff as part of their customs duties at international airports, and turns away people who try it as part of their screening duties.

People who do that sort of thing must understand that doing so likely means they will have to lose their child. But even so, that child is by all rights a citizen of the nation. So while it would be sad knowing that your child will be taken the goal has been done. Their child is hopefully going to have a far better life here than in whatever nation their mother or father was from.

 

[Bacle]

People who do that sort of thing must understand that doing so likely means they will have to lose their child. But even so, that child is by all rights a citizen of the nation. So while it would be sad knowing that your child will be taken the goal has been done. Their child is hopefully going to have a far better life here than in whatever nation their mother or father was from.

Why should two foreign nationals, neither of whom has any preexisting connection to the US, be allowed to come to the US explicitly to abuse it's immigration system to try to create a US citizenship for their child out of whole cloth by knowingly timing a trip to the US when near the expected due date?

Also, the couple's home nation will never get better if they keep trying to use the US as an 'escape valve' instead of trying to improve things at home.

 

[Bear Ribs]

The rule is the only thing keeping dipshits like Prince Harry from trying to run for POTUS using his vast network of royal connections.

Same with keeping the House of Saud from trying it as well.

The rule is necessary to keep foreign powers from trying to play a long game and gain direct control of the highest office in the US.

This is a good point. The US is really, really bad at long-term thinking compared to most other countries. It would be nigh-impossible to run a scheme that takes 40-50 years going in the US through half a dozen different administrations, half of whom are actively antagonistic to the other half. But for a hereditary dictatorship like Saudi Arabia or North Korea, there might only be two or perhaps three leaders in that amount of time, all of the same attitude and each trained by his predecessor/father so such a plan could be viable for them.

 

[KilroywasNOTHere]

I admit that at this point I'd trust an immigrant who actually wants to flee from the horrors of communism vs a natural born who romanticizes communism because he or she doesn't know what it's like.

 

[Abhorsen]

The rule is the only thing keeping dipshits like Prince Harry from trying to run for POTUS using his vast network of royal connections.

Same with keeping the House of Saud from trying it as well.

The rule is necessary to keep foreign powers from trying to play a long game and gain direct control of the highest office in the US.

So those two are prevented in three ways from the constitution (need to be a citizen, can't be foreign nobility, and need to be natural born), on top of my proposed replacement requirement blocking them (which would only replace one of the two current problems), and on top of people having to vote for them, which is doubtful.

Ummm...considering what the average citizen actually knows about a candidate for office might fill a thimble...I don't agree with that being a useful bar at all.

Eh, "Foreigner, get out" works pretty well against immigrants, especially those that don't act American. The issue is that we have a bunch of 'Americans' by birth that don't act American. In contrast, those who immigrate and become citizens are fairly likely to act American and appreciate it.

 

[WolfBear]

Also, the couple's home nation will never get better if they keep trying to use the US as an 'escape valve' instead of trying to improve things at home.

By that logic, though, the ancestors of present-day Americans were likewise wrong in leaving their own home countries, no? For instance, my own parents were wrong in leaving Russia and moving to Israel and then leaving Israel and moving to the US, no?

 

[ShieldWife]

By that logic, though, the ancestors of present-day Americans were likewise wrong in leaving their own home countries, no? For instance, my own parents were wrong in leaving Russia and moving to Israel and then leaving Israel and moving to the US, no?

Maybe they were wrong. The modern world is in the state it’s now in because of millennia of people doing horrible things. If every time we wanted to prohibit something bad, they said “well, your ancestors did those bad things” then no evil deed would be prohibited.

 

[WolfBear]

Maybe they were wrong. The modern world is in the state it’s now in because of millennia of people doing horrible things. If every time we wanted to prohibit something bad, they said “well, your ancestors did those bad things” then no evil deed would be prohibited.

What European country did your own ancestors come from? Would you have preferred to have lived there or in the US right now?

 

[WolfBear]

I disagree. I don't see any sound reason why a baby born in US airspace or on US land shouldn't be a citizen of the United States by place of their birth.

Because their parents have no connection to the US? Of course, you could say "You are not your parents", but then why not make US citizenship available on demand to anyone who wants it?

 

[ShieldWife]

What European country did your own ancestors come from? Would you have preferred to have lived there or in the US right now?

A mix of variously north Western European groups, mostly Germanic or British Isles. My maiden name comes from a prominent family who were Norman lords of Ireland.

I can’t say that I would rather live in Ireland now than the USA, or maybe it should be Normandy, or maybe it should be Scandinavia, or should it be the Eurasian steppes? Where does the regression stop?

We can only decide based on our current circumstances, not on what my ancestors did.

 

[SpaceOrbis]

Because their parents have no connection to the US? Of course, you could say "You are not your parents", but then why not make US citizenship available on-demand to anyone who wants it?

And we do? Just about everybody living here is from other places. We kind of killed off most of the natives by the 20th century. But if you were born in US airspace or on US soil you are by all rights a US citizen by means of your birth place. It's one of the ways people can become a citizen of this nation. You can be born here or you can go through a long process of becoming a citizen of the United States but at the end of the day, the outcome is the same. You're a citizen of the United States.

I would maybe add a time thing that states that you must have been a citizen for no less than five years. It'll at least help in that area. Five years will be enough time I feel to have some sort of connection to the nation.

 

[KilroywasNOTHere]

Maybe they were wrong. The modern world is in the state it’s now in because of millennia of people doing horrible things. If every time we wanted to prohibit something bad, they said “well, your ancestors did those bad things” then no evil deed would be prohibited.

counter argument. Yet it's always someone else's responsibility to "Do the right thing." Take the whole ethno nationalist thing. When boiled down it's essentially an argument of whether America belongs to the brits/UK or the Germans and buzzwords like "Blood and soil" & Sovereignty and how minorities should stop fleeing to America and fight the good fight and take back the country of their ancestors. Yet they themselves completely ignored the fact that the native Americans lived on the north and south American continents long before their British or German ancestors ever sailed here. So, by their own logic, they should be taking the next flight to their respective "homelands" and fighting the Arab immigrations going on there. (Both Germany and England are dealing with that.

You can't have it both ways. You can't guilt people for the mistakes of their ancestors only to absolve yourself from yours.

 

[WolfBear]

And we do? Just about everybody living here is from other places. We kind of killed off most of the natives by the 20th century. But if you were born in US airspace or on US soil you are by all rights a US citizen by means of your birth place. It's one of the ways people can become a citizen of this nation. You can be born here or you can go through a long process of becoming a citizen of the United States but at the end of the day, the outcome is the same. You're a citizen of the United States.

I would maybe add a time thing that states that you must have been a citizen for no less than five years. It'll at least help in that area. Five years will be enough time I feel to have some sort of connection to the nation.

We don't make US citizenship available to everyone who wants it because we don't have anything comparable to open borders.

counter argument. Yet it's always someone else's responsibility to "Do the right thing." Take the whole ethno nationalist thing. When boiled down it's essentially an argument of whether America belongs to the brits/UK or the Germans and buzzwords like "Blood and soil" & Sovereignty and how minorities should stop fleeing to America and fight the good fight and take back the country of their ancestors. Yet they themselves completely ignored the fact that the native Americans lived on the north and south American continents long before their British or German ancestors ever sailed here. So, by their own logic, they should be taking the next flight to their respective "homelands" and fighting the Arab immigrations going on there. (Both Germany and England are dealing with that.

You can't have it both ways. You can't guilt people for the mistakes of their ancestors only to absolve yourself from yours.

Well, at least Eastern Europeans are lucky in that regard. Their countries have very few Muslims (other than Russia), after all.

 

[SpaceOrbis]

Why should two foreign nationals, neither of whom has any preexisting connection to the US, be allowed to come to the US explicitly to abuse it's immigration system to try to create a US citizenship for their child out of whole cloth by knowingly timing a trip to the US when near the expected due date?

Also, the couple's home nation will never get better if they keep trying to use the US as an 'escape valve' instead of trying to improve things at home.

This is more a matter of should people go to a nation that is better for their child and have a child there vs here when they have no hope of a better life. Keep in mind it's their child that would be a citizen of the United States. It is also a matter of how broken our immigration system that doing this is seen as the only way to ensure their child has at least a hope for a better life.

I agree that it sucks that people who this but maybe if we do more to get the people in and less trying to keep them out we wouldn't have this happen so much. If people are so willing to become citizens we should do all we can to get them in lawfully.

 

[ShieldWife]

counter argument. Yet it's always someone else's responsibility to "Do the right thing." Take the whole ethno nationalist thing. When boiled down it's essentially an argument of whether America belongs to the brits/UK or the Germans and buzzwords like "Blood and soil" & Sovereignty and how minorities should stop fleeing to America and fight the good fight and take back the country of their ancestors. Yet they themselves completely ignored the fact that the native Americans lived on the north and south American continents long before their British or German ancestors ever sailed here. So, by their own logic, they should be taking the next flight to their respective "homelands" and fighting the Arab immigrations going on there.

You can't have it both ways. You can guilt people for the mistakes of their ancestors only to absolve yourself from yours.

That’s bullshit. Sorry, it is. The entire world’s political landscape is based on conquest. Is Turkey going to let Istanbul become Christian again? Are Arabs going to give Egypt back to Khemetic pagans? When are the Japanese going to leave the island and give it back to the Ainu? Never, that is when.

The USA has been a country with a distinct identity for over two centuries. We were born of conquest just like all large nations are. So we’re supposed to leave lay down and let hostile foreigners conquer us without even raising a hand to defend ourselves? Or if not that, then ethnically cleanse ourselves from a land we have lived on for centuries and return the land to numerous Stone Age tribes that lived here before?

That is madness. What non-Western civilization is held to such a standard: that our own elimination is a moral imperative?

 

[KilroywasNOTHere]

That’s bullshit. Sorry, it is. The entire world’s political landscape is based on conquest. Is Turkey going to let Istanbul become Christian again? Are Arabs going to give Egypt back to Khemetic pagans? When are the Japanese going to leave the island and give it back to the Ainu? Never, that is when.

The USA has been a country with a distinct identity for over two centuries. We were born of conquest just like all large nations are. So we’re supposed to leave lay down and let hostile foreigners conquer us without even raising a hand to defend ourselves? Or if not that, then ethnically cleanse ourselves from a land we have lived on for centuries and return the land to numerous Stone Age tribes that lived here before?

That is madness. What non-Western civilization is held to such a standard: that our own elimination is a moral imperative?

are you actually going to fight or are you going to whine and cry on the internet? You talk about raising your hand to defend yourselves and I haven't seen any of your type to raise a hand yet, I'm not even talking about violence. Where is your declaration to run for office in an "America for the Germans" platform or your public endorsement of a candidate who supports such a platform? by your own definition you've been conquered. Poop or get off the pot. If you poop, I won't vote for you, but I'll give you props. But if all you're going to do is whine...*sigh* forget it

and to answer your bold lettered question, I'd be completely ok letting the middle east rot lord only knows it's been salted beyond repair. It's a glassed landscape.

 

[Bacle]

By that logic, though, the ancestors of present-day Americans were likewise wrong in leaving their own home countries, no? For instance, my own parents were wrong in leaving Russia and moving to Israel and then leaving Israel and moving to the US, no?

No, because a lot of the ancestors of many Americans came to the US before there WAS a US, and we're here when the Revolutionary War happened. That makes them Americans, not immigrants or citizens of other nations who 'came' here.

For example one of my ancestors was Daniel Boone himself, who kept the Brits and Indians off Washington's western flank and scouted out the Cumberland Gap. And that goes double for anyone with Native American ancestory, or family who were on the land before the US became a thing or took control of the land (Norteno Hispanic families in the West, for example).

Not everyone in the US is a 'child of immigrants' despite what the Left spouts, and treating everyone in the US as a child of immigrants is a farce the neolibs came up with. It's part of why I left the Dems.

So acting like the standards we have for immigration now are should be turned round to attack people who came before in some pathetic 'gatcha' moment is a hallmark of Leftist bullshit.

And we do? Just about everybody living here is from other places. We kind of killed off most of the natives by the 20th century. But if you were born in US airspace or on US soil you are by all rights a US citizen by means of your birth place. It's one of the ways people can become a citizen of this nation. You can be born here or you can go through a long process of becoming a citizen of the United States but at the end of the day, the outcome is the same. You're a citizen of the United States.

I would maybe add a time thing that states that you must have been a citizen for no less than five years. It'll at least help in that area. Five years will be enough time I feel to have some sort of connection to the nation.

This is more a matter of should people go to a nation that is better for their child and have a child there vs here when they have no hope of a better life. Keep in mind it's their child that would be a citizen of the United States. It is also a matter of how broken our immigration system that doing this is seen as the only way to ensure their child has at least a hope for a better life.

I agree that it sucks that people who this but maybe if we do more to get the people in and less trying to keep them out we wouldn't have this happen so much. If people are so willing to become citizens we should do all we can to get them in lawfully.

America is not a 'land of immigrants' despite what Lefty lies proclaim, or what that stupid poem says on the Statue of Liberty implies.

We are not obligated to allow people to abuse our immigration system to pull fast ones on the American public, simply because things are not perfect in someone's home country. If people are truly fleeing for their lives, they can try for refugee status; just wanting to get your kid US citizenship using a well-timed vacation is not something the US wants to encoarage and that is why CBP has pregnancy issues as part of it's screening.

America is not obligated to be the place that takes in all the rest of the world's charity cases and problems. Our immigration system is too easy to abuse as is, no way should we make it any loser. We need to focus on making things better for the people already here, which is difficult as is.

 

[KilroywasNOTHere]

No, because a lot of the ancestors of many Americans came to the US before there WAS a US, and we're here when the Revolutionary War happened. That makes them Americans, not immigrants or citizens of other nations who 'came' here.

For example one of my ancestors was Daniel Boone himself, who kept the Brits and Indians off Washington's western flank and scouted out the Cumberland Gap. And that goes double for anyone with Native American ancestory, or family who were on the land before the US became a thing or took control of the land (Norteno Hispanic families in the West, for example).

Not everyone in the US is a 'child of immigrants' despite what the Left spouts, and treating everyone in the US as a child of immigrants is a farce the neolibs came up with. It's part of why I left the Dems.

So acting like the standards we have for immigration now are should be turned round to attack people who came before in some pathetic 'gatcha' moment is a hallmark of Leftist bullshit.

America is not a 'land of immigrants' despite what Lefty lies proclaim, or what that stupid poem says on the Statue of Liberty implies.

We are not obligated to allow people to abuse our immigration system to pull fast ones on the American public, simply because things are not perfect in someone's home country. If people are truly fleeing for their lives, they can try for refugee status; just wanting to get your kid US citizenship using a well-timed vacation is not something the US wants to encoarage and that is why CBP has pregnancy issues as part of it's screening.

America is not obligated to be the place that takes in all the rest of the world's charity cases and problems. Our immigration system is too easy to abuse as is, no way should we make it any loser. We need to focus on making things better for the people already here, which is difficult as is.

I think most people by this point are the children of immigrants as most of the original families have died out or have intermarried into immigrant bloodlines. Most whites at this point are about as British or as German as so called "African" Americans are actually African. We can argue about whether we need to put a no vacancy sign on the American but unless we actually plan to start a civil war (please for the love of all things good no.) Arguing about which bloodline America "rightfully" belongs to is stupid. This is The United States of America not Crusader Kings 2.

Say we decided that only "True Americans" should stay in America by what standard do we use? do we roleback the policies of fifty years ago and kick out all of the 2nd and 3rd generation Americans that can't trace back their citizenship to at least thier grandfather, do we go back to "How it was originally intended" and essentially kick out all of the Scotch-Irish? Do we send all the people with any sort of African American blood in them to Liberia. How far does this have to go before people actually start feeling comfortable in thier own skin?