Lest we control who becomes a citizen we will have a diminishing quality of citizen and a diminishing quality of life, both economic and otherwise. 

It is as if we are just hiding our head in the sand (and/or letting politics rule) on this issue. 

The relevant part of the 14th Amendment:  "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 text of the 14th Amendment is included at Wikipedia.)   So, we are talking about people subject to the jurisdiction of the United States.

The definition of jurisdiction that applies here is subject to the authority of a sovereign power. 

"Therefore, the Fourteenth Amendment acts to recognize all persons as citizens who do not owe allegiance to some other government when naturalized or born."  What It Really Means

Of course, all who enter our country are subject to following the laws, but that does not mean they are "under the jurisdiction of" the country in a lasting sense or in a broad sense!   They must not act criminally, yes, but they are still mostly subject to following the laws of their own country, including taxing laws, ownership laws, passport laws and many, many, many other laws.  Therefore, in no material (major) sense are people who enter the United States from a foreign country under the jurisdiction of the US - the foreign country still has even "juridiction" over the person in terms of being able to bring them to justice via extradition.  If you have any reasonable arguments for or against the proof that the US has juridiction (power) over a foreign entrant that is greater than the entrant's country, provide that by tacking a comment on any entry in the Blog: Rational Political Dialogue.

For some strange reason, we have been allowing the automatic citizenship of anybody being born in the US.  Perhaps we need to clarify what the timeline is for "jurisdiction", so that we will not accidentally, much to the harm of the US, make people citizens where it is not appropriate.

The "and subject to the jurisdiction thereof" is a key qualifier.  I would say that it is logical that illegals are not "subject to the jurisdiction of the US but are subject to the jurisdiction of their own country.

Illegals have refused to be subject to the jurisdiction simply because they chose to ignore the laws related to illegal immigration and entry.  Therefore, their children could not become citizens.

There is no basis to maintain that any of these children of illegal immigrants are citizens, so therefore they are not. 

"But, they are innocent victims and therefore..." some say, as if there is some commitment to take care of people who are not citizens.

So, this creates some murkiness of the issue on children already here.  We need to declare it clearly and immediately, so that we can stop the leaks, that any children born of illegals will not be given automatic citizenship.

As for those already here, we have every right to kick them out of the country, perhaps with some transition measures.  Once we cut off the automatic citizenship for newly born children of illegals, the incentive to enter illegally for that reason is gone.  (And all those parents and the children must be immediately deported.)

If they are already serving in the military, then they would lose their status as illegals but still have to earn the citizenship as any legal resident non-citizen would have to.  There is no basis for allowing children of illegals to gain citizenship by going to college.
The Dream Act is profoundly unsound and illogical.

See, below, "What To Do".


There are alot of hispanic voters. Most illegals are from Mexico.  Many of the illegals are related to those voters. 

Therefore, politicians are hesitant to go against the wishes of the hispanic voters. 

However, it is hurting our country.  Lowering the average education level of the country and the average income.  Huge costs are incurred for illegals, in terms of health care, education costs (even college!), and welfare. 

There must be a campaign (education effort) to have the politicians, even Obama, stop hedging on this issue - the citizenship issue and all of illegal immigration.

A great quote in an article on this subject :  "The biggest obstacle to such a draconian solution is political, as most of our politicians do not have the fortitude or integrity to enforce the laws of the land."   The Dark Side Of Illegal Immigration 


Other than already being in or having been in the military, all children of illegals are considered as illegals, for they certainly are not legal(!).

Any granting of citizenship that we do enable for children of illegal immigrant or the illegal immigrants themselves should be "conditional".  Any breaking of  the law at a pre-set level or above would cancel the conditional citizenship.  However, that could be limited to age 36 and before (or 15 years, the longer of the two), so that there is some point where they can be unconditionally a citizen and then vote.  (The Democrats would favor the granting of voting rights at 18, but logically there is no other reason to grant that to a conditional citizen. 

Logistically, yes, it is difficult to find and deport all who are illegal residents.  If we allow some path to citizenship, it shall not be allowed for those who subsequently enter illegally.  Anybody who cannot prove they were already here would be deported, though, as an option, proof of being here could be established by registering with the authorities by a certain date. 

There will be no perfect solution, but we shouldn't let that stop us from getting 90% of the benefit of acting on this instead of letting it get worse and continue to cost us so very much.  We are not a charity nor someone who can take in all those who ask.

Consider in your review of this matter, the strategies proposed in The Dark Side Of Illegal Immigration.  

Arguments re jurisdiction:

Amusing, smart:  Resolved Question  (also encouragement to "thing outside the voting
Subject to the jurisdiction