DEFUND SANC CITIES AND STOP ANCHOR BABY LAW ....NOW!

To save the country and reverse the damage that's already been done, the following should happen ASAP.

1. Trump should cut federal funding to sanctuary cities who not only harbor illegals but are teaching them they are in fact entitled to come here and live off American taxpayers ever burdening our already crippled economy which was the legacy Obama and the progressive democrats left Trump. And since sanctuary city officials don't seem to mind breaking the law and going rogue for these lawbreakers, then THEY should be the ones who should have to foot the bill to house and take care of them; not the federal government and taxpayers.

2. Trump needs to get rid of that idiotic anchor baby law that allows women to step across the border at nine months pregnant, have their child, and then be awarded American citizenship just because the child was born on American soil. The citizenship status of the infant should follow and be the same as the parent.

3. And lastly sanctuary cities should also have to forfeit their rights to vote in all upcoming elections because let's fact it, anyone that would go that far to break the law to harbor criminals, would no doubt also hand them ballots and names of dead people so they can vote which according to several reliable news sources happened a lot in the 2016 election. So the truth is, if not for all the election fraud, Hillary wouldn't have won the popular vote either.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...inds-dozens-ballots-stacked-outside-home.html

https://www.yahoo.com/news/report-500-ineligible-voters-cast-ballots-north-carolina-170423848.html

http://alexanderhiggins.com/stanfor...on-primary-without-widespread-election-fraud/

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/...rado-chicago-edit-0927-md-20160926-story.html

http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/florida-elections-worker-alleges/2016/11/04/id/757191/

http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2016...-votes-being-cast-from-grave-year-after-year/

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/surge-of-migrants-illegally-crossing-us-mexico-border-ahead-of-election/

http://rickwells.us/ice-agents-admit-obama-flooding-us-illegals/

AND DOZENS MORE LINKS WHERE THOSE CAME FROM.

 

Nice effort, but IMO #2 is a bit problematic and needs modification.

 

I believe Texas has already stopped giving citizenship to babies of illegal aliens. There was a lawsuit but I don't know the results of that suit.

 

It won't work because if you are on US soil the US government has jurisdiction.. These babies are born on US soil. They are US citizens not Mexican citizens.

 

That's a great start. I'm down with all of it .

 

Been doing it for two years so far. So....

 

The constitutional amendment was never intended to be for "anchor babies". It was passed to give citizenship to former slaves (after the Civil War) who were "born in the U.S.".

It wasn't meant for Mexican and Chinese women to get here and pop out a baby.

 

So these children are stateless?

 

Who told you that?

 

I have a master's degree in American history.

 

Nope, their citizenship follows that of their parents.

ETA: The babies go back when the parents ultimately get deported.

 

1# Sanctuary cities contribute to the government's tax revenue. If we're going to cut their funding then there's not much reason for them to pay their taxes. I wouldn't pay my water company if the stopped services. In the case of larger cities in California they might actually be better off not paying taxes and just keeping their money local. Not sure cutting funding is a good idea.

2# Could stand review probably. Not sure what law makes this the case at the moment anyway.

3# Whoa there, taking away the constitutional rights of citizens on a mass scale is a pretty shaky idea if you ask me. I'd dare say it goes against American ideals and whatnot. Consider revising.

Are local law officials required to enforce federal immigration laws? Might be something the federal government should be taking care of if it's so concerned about the issue.

 

Based on what law?

 

Sanctuary cities shield murderers and rapists. Why would anyone support that?

 

Texas law.

 

American blacks were given the right to vote on February 3, 1870 by the 15th Amendment to the United States Constitution. This amendment aimed to give all blacks this freedom, the South unfairly limited voting by enforcing literacy tests, poll taxes and other obstacles......

US citizenship law is better explained here:

8 U.S.C. § 1401 - U.S. Code Title 8. Aliens and Nationality § 1401 .

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1401

 

Does the state of Texas grant citizenship?

 

I googled it and it looks as though Texas denies the babies a birth certificate.

 

Apparently not, and it looks like Texas achieves that by denying babies of illegal aliens a birth certificate.

 

TEXT OF 14th AMENDMENT



AMENDMENT XIV

SECTION 1.

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. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

 

Ok. But the constitutional amendment was never intended to give babies citizenship when women arrive here from foreign nations in their ninth month of pregnancy. It was intended for former slaves. It was passed in 1868, three years after the Civil War.

 

Again, been doing it for two years, so......

 

Well I would agree a modification to the 14th amendment should have one need to have one American parent proven using the best current options to be considered a citizen automatically. So they would only need a DNA test and it must show the man or woman is the parent of the child. And I would add non-citizens are only entitled when on American soil ,including military bases and embassies, to the Bill of Rights protections and those protections under treaty obligated to applied in the way that preserves the benefits for citizens over the foreign national.

That should fix the problems of anchor babies and eliminate illegals and others access to most if not all social welfare, education and medical care options foreign nationals have in the nation. So they can walk in but not get education for children free unless they are subject to a treaty we signed or are eighteen or over and born of one citizen. And we could more openly deal with foreign nationals here illegally since their protections would be fewer generally foreign workers would be here under law not more than that so could be tossed out far easier. And children born here even if one parent was a citizen would have no fundamental right to stay but a law could allow it but laws can be changed easy enough if Dreamers are a problem.

 

Texas doesn't follow US law or the constitution? What is the source of Texas law?

 

That's what the lawsuit was filed for, not sure of the result.