Quote:
|
Birthright citizenship in the United States of America follows from the rule of jus soli whereby any person born within the United States and subject to its jurisdiction is automatically granted U.S. citizenship. This status is unaffected by the legal status or the citizenship of that individual's mother or father. American Indian tribal members are not covered specifically by the constitutional guarantee, but they were made citizens automatically by the Indian Citizenship Act of 1924. Children born to foreign diplomats or to hostile enemy forces or born on U.S. territory while it is under the control of a foreign power are not considered subject to U.S. jurisdiction and therefore are not citizens at birth. Throughout much of the history of the United States, the fundamental legal principle governing citizenship has been that birth within the territorial limits of the United States confers United States citizenship, although the United States did not grant citizenship to all black former slaves until the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1866, which was subsequently confirmed by the Fourteenth Amendment.
|
Most laws work until situations or loopholes arise that destroy the original intent of the law itself...
When this first went into effect, the subject of "anchor babies" was not in play...
But now that they are, do the laws need to change or do you believe that birthright citizenship should stay?...