OK, here we go again taking on a very large topic with just some good old common sense and easy to follow references. One of the largest problems confronting us today is the "undocumented people and economy" which is created when participants are not in the system. Most specifically I think of illegal immigrants and drug sales. We will get to the drug sales in a future column but today we are focusing on what we now refer to as "Illegal Immigration" and "Birthright Citizenship".
By some sources, there are 11,000,000 - 25,000,000 "illegal aliens", "undocumented immigrants", "criminals" whatever you want to call them here right now. In addition, some 8% of the babies born in America right now are born to illegals. The point of this discussion is not to illustrate all the negatives this creates in society (that has been done well by others and is pretty obvious in general), but to look at it more simply in terms of common sense and a general "why would we tolerate this" analysis. The Founders likely did not contemplate that the government would abdicate its duty and allow a problem like this to develop into such gigantic problem.
Since everyone originally was an immigrant the Founders came up with language and a process to address citizenship. As always I like to start with that pesky Constitution. Let's have a look at it. First we have to read the actual language as written in the Constitution Article 2 that relates to this "citizenship issue" and of course it does not directly relate to this illegal problem we are discussing.
The Constitution does not outright declare what an American Citizen is. It does define who you need to be in terms of birthright to be President and it is from this clause that most discussions begin. We are all in agreement that the Founders were adamant to prevent a British Citizen (themselves excluded perhaps) from ever being President. So let's continue from there.
By some sources, there are 11,000,000 - 25,000,000 "illegal aliens", "undocumented immigrants", "criminals" whatever you want to call them here right now. In addition, some 8% of the babies born in America right now are born to illegals. The point of this discussion is not to illustrate all the negatives this creates in society (that has been done well by others and is pretty obvious in general), but to look at it more simply in terms of common sense and a general "why would we tolerate this" analysis. The Founders likely did not contemplate that the government would abdicate its duty and allow a problem like this to develop into such gigantic problem. Since everyone originally was an immigrant the Founders came up with language and a process to address citizenship. As always I like to start with that pesky Constitution. Let's have a look at it. First we have to read the actual language as written in the Constitution Article 2 that relates to this "citizenship issue" and of course it does not directly relate to this illegal problem we are discussing.
The Constitution does not outright declare what an American Citizen is. It does define who you need to be in terms of birthright to be President and it is from this clause that most discussions begin. We are all in agreement that the Founders were adamant to prevent a British Citizen (themselves excluded perhaps) from ever being President. So let's continue from there.
"No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States."
Whew. That is quite a mouthful. But these Founding Fathers were men of letters and wrote the rules very consciously and specifically (they were not just sneaky lawyers and lobbyists like we have today). Sometimes it is tricky to figure out what they meant and in a couple instances we have had to fix things that were wrong or unclear. In this instance, this terminology has not really been vetted by the highest courts. Most Courts with the opportunity have chickened out including the Supremes. But at CitizenBill.com we never chicken out. Let's take this one on, seems kind of simple to me.
First we can strip that original phrase down to remove any language that could not apply to today or is not needed because we do not have any argument with. Here is again:
"No person except a natural born Citizen shall be eligible to the Office of President ... and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States."
So there we have it, we have stripped down a harder to grasp clause into something very simple that we can further dissect into its final components. Then we can apply that knowledge/conclusion to the argument at hand. And seems to me we can get rid of the fourteen years as long as we adequately provide for it in our final argument. Seems simple enough the founders did not want you to move away most of your life and come back to be President. So lets let rid of that. Now we are down to:
"No person except a natural born Citizen shall be eligible to the Office of President".
Now all we have to do is define "natural born" and "Citizen" and we should have our answer. Let's start with natural born. I don't think the founders were actually contemplating "in vitro" or test tube babies so that cannot be what they meant. In fact, in the First Naturalization Act of 1790 there was a "probationary period" where fellow citizens would determine if you have the correct character to be an American. Later we codified it more with the 14th Amendment.
The Fourteen Amendment defined Citizens.. "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." Let's look at that one again and emphasis one clause that seems missing from the present discussion.
"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."
Are "illegal aliens" (ok undocumented immigrants for the politically correct Obama crowd) "subject to our jurisdiction"? I would make the argument that their very illegality makes them NOT subject to "our jurisdiction thereof". And if the parents are not here legally and subject to our rules and jurisdiction, then so to their children would not be subject to it either. Thus in this scenario which is playing out every day in America, in no way can they be conferred "Citizen" status solely by virtue of the physical location of their birth.
Does it make sense that the Founders would allow for citizenship by parents who are acting illegally? They mere fact that someone could sneak in illegally or swim a river does not mean they can "squat Americans" simply by sneaking in or getting to the other side or the river? I do not believe that is what anyone past or present, Republican or Democrat, conservative or liberal ever intended. And since these numbers represent a significant amount of our people (10% of the workforce in a land of 25% unemployment), I think it is time we had the honest discussion and clarified this language (for those taking advantage of it and honestly saying it was not clear). Both Parties seem to be weak hoping for votes or in todays system no negative publicity ("do nothing" is a safe course of action for political types).
Until we fix this (which I think could be done easily with a stroke of the pen.. use one of those Executive Orders we seem to flop about daily) our borders are worthless and legal immigration a waste of time (god bless the good folks who when through the system the correct way). We need to fix this ambiguity in the language and legalize the folks already here. Anyone so legalized can never vote, and can participate in social security, medicare etc to the extent of their contribution just like Americans. But I will flush this plan out elsewhere. That is all the Labor for today!
God Bless Citizen Bill, his Family and all his Friends.
No comments:
Post a Comment