Not only I agree with Trump and former assistant AG for Reagan, Mark Levine, I also believe that children of tourists, who come legally, are not entitled to US citizenship, if both parents are foreign citizens

Not only I agree with Trump and former AG for Reagan, Mark Levine, I also believe that children of tourists, who come legally, are not entitled to US citizenship, if both parents are foreign citizens

By Dr. Orly Taitz, ESQ

I was asked to comment on the issue of the birthright citizenship.

Virginia in VA 25 approved

Submitted on 2015/08/19 at 6:44 pm Orly, as a constitutional lawyer, can you tell us your view of whether “Birthright Citizenship” is constitutional and whether children of illegals can be citizens? It would be great to know your view.

Jeb Bush Trashes Trump In Spanish TV Interview – Promises Amnesty. Taitz to Jeb Bush: why don’t you run for president of Mexico, you’ll get high poll numbers there

So, here is my response.

First of all, let’s look at the recent decision of the Supreme Court on Obamacare. The law stated that individuals covered by state exchanges can get subsidies from the federal government. It clearly stated “state exchanges”. However 5 of 9 judges of the Supreme Court  did not go by the black letter law, rather, they went by the intend of the legislature. They claimed that the intent was to give subsidizes to everyone, not just ones, who enrolled through the state exchanges.

So, let’s look at the intent of the legislature at the time the 14 th amendment was passed into law. The legislature wanted to grant citizenship to blacks, who resided in this country for generations and did not have citizenship in any other country. The legislature did not envision citizens of foreign countries flooding this country and demanding US citizenship for their US born children. Just as children of the US citizens, born abroad, automatically get US citizenship based on “jus sanguinis,” the citizenship of their parents, similarly, citizens of Mexico, China and other countries   automatically get citizenship of Mexico, China and other countries based on their “jus sanguinis,” the citizenship of their parents, even if they are born in the US.

Furthermore, Senator Jacob Howard, the author of the 1th amendement, specifically stated that it did not apply to foreigners and aliens.

So, the intent was clear, not to grant the US citizenship to children of foreign citizens.

Further, aside from the intent, the black letter law supports Trump’s, Walker’s, Cruz’s and Paul’s assertion. The fourteenth amendment clearly states that the child has to be born in the US and be subject to the US jurisdiction, not just be born in the US. Some are saying that the fact of being born in the US is sufficient for being subject to the US jurisdiction. If this would be the case, then the law would just state “born in the US”, it would not state “born in the US and subject to the jurisdiction”. Jurisdiction means allegiance. A child, born in the US, whose parents are both foreign citizens, has allegiance to the countries of origin of his parents and he is subject to the jurisdiction of those nations.

Proponents of the practice of the anchor baby citizenship point to United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898). However, this case expressly qualified the defendant’s right to citizenship based on “permanent residence” of his parents. It did not relate to children of  illegal aliens and children of tourists.

So, based on the intent of the legislature and the black letter law, birthright citizenship relates only to:

1. children born in the US, who have at least one parent who is a US citizen.

2. Wong Kim Ark possibly extended this to children, whose parents have a permanent US residency status, namely Green Card.

As such, children born in the US to non-citizens, follow the legal status of their parents. They inherit the foreign citizenship of their parents and immigration status of their parents:

1. a child born to a tourist, who has a 6 months tourist visa, should receive a 6 month tourist visa and has to leave together with his parents after 6 months.

2. A child born in the US to foreign citizen parents, who are here for a  year on a work visa,  are entitled to a foreign citizenship of their parents and a 1 year visa in the US.

3. A child of a foreign student, who has a  4 year visa to finish his degree, is entitled to the foreign citizenship of his parents and a 4 year visa in the US.

4. A child of illegal aliens born in the US, is entitled to the foreign citizenship of his parents, and just as his parents, is not entitled to stay in the US.

It is important to note that according to the latest Rasmussen poll, the public is fed up with the anchor baby practices and the birthright tourism and by majority of votes want to end it. Recently, in the neighboring city of Irvine FBI and ICE raided a large ring of criminals, who brought in thousands of pregnant women from China, who are engaged in birthright tourism. Their babies get the US citizenship,  they go back to China and come back to the US around age 14-15. They automatically get enrolled in high schools here. They get free education, health-care, all of their social needs are met. They enroll in state universities and take the spots of children, who are US citizens, whose parents worked all their lives and paid taxes to support these universities.

We are seeing a flood of illegal aliens from Mexico and Central America. True numbers are becoming known to the public and by admission of the former Mexican ambassador we have around 30 million illegal aliens. Every year 400,000  children are born to these illegal aliens. Because vast majority of illegal aliens live under the poverty line, these children get free health care, food stamps, housing, education and other social aid. Their whole families received aid based on those anchor babies. We, law abiding US citizens, are robbed of billions of dollars due to birthright tourism and anchor baby practices. The law says it is illegal and the public is saying enough is enough. This is one of the reasons Trump is far ahead in GOP primary and he is now beating Clinton in the key swing state of Florida, he is in a statistical tie with Clinton in IA and nationwide.   Trump is already beating Clinton among male voters and white voters nationwide. He is catching up among female and minority voters. I believe that the recent phenomenon of Trump and Sanders rising, shows that the nation is fed up with lawlessness and corruption in all three branches of our government. Trump and Sanders rise might be the harbinger of the Second American revolution. People are taking their country back from the grip of lawlessness and corruption.

Source: http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/not-only-i-agree-with-trump-and-former-ag-for-reagan-mark-levine-i-also-believe-that-children-of-tourists-who-come-legally-are-not-entitled-to-us-citizenship-if-both-parents-are-foreign-citizens/