Kill this bill:
Arizona Senate Bill
1308 Defines Dual Citizens As Natural Born Citizens
By: Devvy
March 1, 2011 Sen. Russell Pearce [R-AZ] has been a champion on the front lines
against illegal immigration out in Arizona along with his colleagues
who believe our immigration laws must be enforced. I have interviewed
Sen. Pearce on the radio and have a great deal of respect for him.
However, he and Sen. Ron Gould [R-AZ] have pushed a
bill through one of their committees that I believe is dangerous
and will not pass a constitutional challenge, so I must speak out.
As regular readers of my columns and those following the inexcusable
farce regarding the usurper in the White House's constitutional
ineligibility to be president of these united States of America, you
will recognize the name Leo Donofrio. Leo is an attorney. His case was
the first eligibility challenge to make it to the U.S Supreme Court;
the court chose not to do their constitutional duty. This is Leo's
legal analysis of SB 1308:
BEWARE: Arizona
Senate Bill 1308 Defines Dual Citizens As Natural Born Citizens.
February 23, 2011
"Arizona Senate Bill 1308 passed out of committee yesterday by an 8-5
vote. This bill is a cleverly disguised attempt to protect
President Obama from eligibility scrutiny. It does this by declaring
persons born with dual citizenship as natural born citizens. But
it does this in a very sneaky manner. That's right. Arizona has
now passed out of committee a bill which states that persons born with
dual citizenship are natural born citizens of the United States. This
same bill is being considered by all states party to the compact.
"So infamous congratulations to the 8 votes in Arizona who passed this
unconstitutional bill to the full Senate floor. They've just declared
those born as dual citizens eligible to be Commander In Chief of the US
Armed Forces. The Arizona Republic completely failed to mention this
incredible turn of events in their report:
“Late Tuesday, the committee advanced two of the bills, becoming the
first state legislative committee in the nation to pass legislation
intended to challenge the practice of granting citizenship to children
born in the U.S. to illegal immigrants.
Committee members voted 8-5 to
approve a controversial package of bills, which would challenge the
14th Amendment interpretation about citizenship.”
This so called “compact” is being pushed by a conglomerate of states,
and it looks like it's being done to protect Obama. SB 1308 declares:
ARTICLE 6. INTERSTATE BIRTH CERTIFICATE COMPACT…
ARTICLE II
Definition
"As used in this compact, “subject to the jurisdiction of the United
States” has the meaning that it bears in section 1 of the fourteenth
amendment to the United States Constitution, namely that the person is
a child of at least one parent who owes no allegiance to any foreign
sovereignty, or a child without citizenship or nationality in any
foreign country."
ARTICLE III
Terms
"…A person who is born subject to the jurisdiction of the United States
is a natural born United States citizen.
"Article II defines a person… “born subject to the jurisdiction
of the United States” … as … “a child born to at least one parent who
owes no allegiance to any foreign sovereignty“.
"Article III declares that… “A person who is born subject to the
jurisdiction of the United States is a natural born United States
citizen.”
"Sneaky bastards all around. When the relevant section of Article
II is read in conjunction with the relevant section of Article III, you
have a complete declaration that a person born of one citizen parent is
a “natural born United States citizen”.
"According to that definition, a person born with dual citizenship is
also a “natural born United States citizen”.
ANCHOR BABIES OUT… OBAMA IN.
"Anchor babies will not be eligible for US citizenship according to
this bill, but Obama will be eligible to be POTUS. Looks like a
deal was struck to protect Obama by attacking the citizenship of
children born on US soil to illegal immigrant parents. Apparently, the
US citizenship of anchor babies is being sacrificed to protect Obama
from competing eligibility legislation – such as Arizona HB 2544 –
which does, in fact, require Presidential candidates to prove they have
never owed allegiance to a foreign nation.
14th AMENDMENT – MARBURY v. MADISON – JOHN BINGHAM
SB 1308 is unconstitutional because it would render the natural born
citizen clause (from Article 2 Section 1) superfluous. That is
not allowed according to the famous SCOTUS decision, Marbury v.
Madison, wherein Chief Justice Marshal stated:
‘It cannot be presumed that any clause in the constitution is intended
to be without effect; and therefore such construction is inadmissible,
unless the words require it.’
"If the 14th Amendment defined “natural born citizen” for the purposes
of POTUS eligibility, then the nbc clause in Article 2 Section 1 would
be rendered meaningless. If the framers of the 14th Amendment had
sought to declare all 14th Amendment citizens to be “natural born
citizens” then that's exactly what the 14th Amendment would say.
"But it doesn't.
"The 14th Amendment – by its very own text – defines who are
“citizens”, but it does not define who is a “natural born
citizen”. Elsewhere in the Constitution, the word “citizen” was
used to define those who are eligible to be Representatives and
Senators. But the word “citizen” was not used to define those
eligible to be POTUS. For that the framers demanded one be a
“natural born citizen”.
"The 14th Amendment does not use the words “natural born”. The
framers could have included those words in the 14th Amendment, but they
chose not to. The compact between the states referenced in Arizona SB
1308 attempts to rewrite the 14th Amendment by adding the words
“natural born” to it.
"Such may only be accomplished by the Constitutional amendment
process. This compact does not meet that standard. In conclusion,
I leave you with the words of John Bingham, one of the people who
drafted the 14th Amendment:
“…every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States
of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the
language of your Constitution itself, a natural-born citizen.”
"Parents. Plural. Not one parent. Two. Two parents not owing allegiance
to any foreign sovereignty. Mr. Bingham would know more about the
intent of the drafters of the 14th Amendment than anyone alive today…
seeing as how Mr. Bingham wrote the 14th Amendment. But hey, who cares
about facts? Who cares about the text of the 14th
Amendment? This is America. The Constitution is what people
say it is, not what it actually says for itself. Welcome to the
living Constitution… and the dying of the USA."
Leo Donofrio, Esq.
As you can see, Leo, is quite harsh in his opinion regarding the true
purpose of the bill's language. Personally, I don't believe Senators
Pearce and Gould have any intentions toward protecting Obama/Soetoro's
battle to evade the truth about his dual citizenship. I do agree with
Leo that a state legislature cannot change Art. 1 of the Fourteenth
Amendment (think Term
Limits and recalling
members of Congress)
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."
SB 1308, Art III, changes the language of that amendment which a state
clearly has no authority to do. That has to be done by a constitutional
amendment. I believe that will be the basis for a legal challenge
should that bill become law.
I also disagree with Leo regarding his statement: "Apparently, the US
citizenship of anchor babies is being sacrificed to protect Obama from
competing eligibility legislation.."
Anchor babies" is simply a bastardization of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Illegal means illegal. If the parent(s) have no legal right to be on US
soil, their off spring are also illegal and must be deported if there
is going to be any respect for our laws. I'm sorry for children of
illegals, but they should blame their parents for sneaking across our
borders, making them criminals in the eyes of the law. However, as
their parents are here illegally, so are they, born here or not.
The letter below is from another individual involved in one of the early eligibility cases:
Dear Arizona State Senate Members of the Committee that introduced this
bill:
In Bill 1308, for the purposes of identifying a "natural born citizen",
the passage in Article II - Definition is utterly and completely
wrong. It is the definition for dual citizens, and for
non-natural born citizens, even though the language appears to deny
it. You must state clearly, instead, that both parents must be
American citizens, born or naturalized, in order for the child to be a
"Natural Born" citizen. Not one, BOTH parents. YOU are opening a
can of judicial worms by failing to make a clear and constrained
definition of Natural Born. Any definition other than both parents
being American citizens is flatly unconstitutional. The Framers
intent, the use of the guiding documents such as DeVattel's Law
of Nations, as well as the fidelity expressed in the congressional
acts, judicial decisions and statements by key politicians over the
last two hundred plus years makes it clear that there is only one
definition of "Natural Born" and you folks are trying to change
it. Don't do it.
Instead, please recognize and stick with the obvious. The U.S.
Constitution has two categories of citizenship: Natural Born
Citizen, and Citizen. Your definition draws no such distinction. A
Citizen meets the same standard as a Natural Born Citizen according to
your definition in Article II. That clearly violates the intent
of the U.S. Constitution. As in the article below, your
definition is an inaccurate and incorrect rendition of the 14th
Amendment. Senator Bingham himself stated that jurisdiction applies to
the children of PARENTS, plural...I repeat, plural. Your twisting of
the language by saying "at least one parent" is going to create a mess
for the future.
You can say that the definition in Article II says the same thing as
what I am asserting, but your definition leaves open all kinds of legal
wrangling and hair splitting over "child without citizenship", or "at
least one parent". Make the definition clear, don't create poor
law.
Leo Donofrio's article makes this point even more clear for you.
Article II SHOULD read this way:
AS USED IN THIS COMPACT, "SUBJECT TO THE JURISDICTION OF THE UNITED
STATES" HAS THE MEANING THAT IT BEARS IN SECTION 1 OF THE FOURTEENTH
AMENDMENT TO THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION, NAMELY THAT THE PERSON IS
A CHILD OF TWO PARENTS WHO ARE BOTH AMERICAN CITIZENS, BY BIRTH OR
NATURALIZATION. THAT CHILD IS DEEMED A NATURAL BORN CITIZEN.
Also, please note the diagram below which does an excellent job of
outlining all the different classifications of citizenship. It makes
abundantly clear what the definition of Natural Born Citizen is
supposed to be.
Sincerely,
Cort Wrotnowski
Greenwich, CT
Court emailed his letter to Senators Pearce, Gold and the other
sponsors of the bill so they are aware many of us are against it.
Am I alone in my objection to the "anchor babies" scam?
The single largest number of criminals sneaking across the border are
Mexicans. Since most illegal aliens come from Mexico, what does their
Constitution say - and thank you to Mothers Against
Illegal Amnesty for bringing this to light several months ago:
Mexican
Constitution - Chapter II
Article 30. Mexican nationality is acquired by birth or by
naturalization:
A. Mexicans by birth are:
I. Those born in the territory of the Republic, regardless of the
nationality of their parents:
II. Those born in a foreign country of Mexican parents; of a Mexican
father and a foreign mother; or of a Mexican mother and an unknown
father;
Quoting Frosty
Wooldridge from is column, January 6, 2011:
"April 4, 1997,
President Sedillo of Mexico stated that "We will not tolerate foreign
forces dictating and enacting laws on Mexicans. Our contention is that
we are not enacting or dictating any laws on the Mexican illegal alien
children born by illegal alien females in the US territory. Further, he
states that "he was going to use all diplomatic and legal forces at his
disposal to protect Mexicans living in the United States."
What Sedillo was saying is legally correct: Illegal aliens who smuggle
themselves across our borders are Mexican citizens and so are their off
spring according to their
Constitution, which is why he vows to protect "Mexicans living
in the United States."
Consider these words from Edward J. Erler, Professor of Political
Science, California State University, San Bernardino, in his column (I
hope you take the time to read all of it): Birthright Citizenship and Dual
Citizenship: Harbingers of Administrative Tyranny
"In sum, this legacy of feudalism—which we today call birthright
citizenship—was decisively rejected as the ground of American
citizenship by the Fourteenth Amendment and the Expatriation Act of
1868. It is absurd, then, to believe that the Fourteenth Amendment
confers the boon of American citizenship on the children of illegal
aliens. Nor does the denial of birthright citizenship visit the sins of
the parents on the children, as is often claimed, since the children of
illegal aliens born in the U.S. are not being denied anything to which
they have a right. Their allegiance should follow that of their parents
during their minority. Furthermore, it is difficult to fathom how those
who defy American law can derive benefits for their children by their
defiance—or that any sovereign nation would allow such a thing."
He further points out:
"But in any case, to say that children of legal aliens are entitled to
citizenship is one thing; after all, their parents are in the country
with the permission of the U.S. It is entirely different with illegal
aliens, who are here without permission. Thus repeal of the current
policy of birthright citizenship for the children of illegal aliens
would not require a constitutional amendment."
Children born on US soil of an illegal alien parent (or two parents)
regardless of country of origin have no "right" to U.S. citizenship.
I'm not a lawyer and I don't know how to write bills for a legislature,
but I sincerely hope Senators Pearce and Gould will withdraw that
dangerous bill. I know how frustrating it is with their state infested
with illegal aliens. Between bleeding their local and state governments
dry with benefits they have no legal right to, and the drugs and
violent illegal offenders, Arizona's lawmakers have every right to act
because it sure as hell will not come from the Outlaw Congress. Yeah,
there has been some noise about it back in DC:
'Anchor
Baby' Constitutional Amendment to Face Scrutiny in Congress
"In a matter of weeks, Congress will go from trying to help young,
illegal immigrants become legal to debating whether children born to
parents who are in the country illegally should continue to enjoy
automatic U.S. citizenship. Such a hardened approach -- and the
rhetoric certain to accompany it -- should resonate with the GOP
faithful who helped swing the House in Republicans' favor. But it also
could further hurt the GOP in its endeavor to grab a large enough share
of the growing Latino vote to win the White House and the Senate
majority in 2012. Legislation to test interpretations of the 14th
Amendment as granting citizenship to the children of illegal immigrants
will emerge early next session."
Forget about pandering to the damn "Latino vote." This is about the law.
Forget about constitutional amendments. This is a favorite play of
Republicans either too stupid to understand how to solve a problem or
led around by the nose by those who don't want a problem solved.
There's no reelection in the cure, only the treatment (If elected, I
promise!). Constitutional amendments take years and in this case as
with dozens of others proposed, there is no need. Nor, will any bill
coming out of the House of Representatives stand a snowball's chance in
hell of going anywhere. With the ethically bankrupt Democrats and RINOs
controlling the senate, and an open border advocate illegally camped
out in the White House, it won't happen. It must be the states enforcing their right
to stop the continuing invasion and legally wrong interpretation of the
Fourteenth Amendment.
I hope you will take the time to call or write a short letter to
Senators Pearce and Russell even if you don't live in Arizona. If you do live in Arizona, please spread
the word. Be polite as always, but ask them to kill that bill
and start over. Or, if time is an issue because the cut off date has
passed for introduction of new bills, if their senate rules allow,
amend the bill. As it is written, SB 1308 is poison and must be stopped
from passage by their full legislature.
Please take the time because several other states are looking at that
bill as a model. We don't need a bill that's going to get shot down on
constitutional grounds and set a horrible legal precedent. Here are the
addresses:
Sen. Russell Pearce and Senator Ron Gould: Arizona State Senate,
Capitol Complex, 1700 West Washington, Phoenix, AZ 85007-2890
Links:
1
- Police Ordered To Stop “Incidental Immigration Enforcement”
2
- Colorado May Subsidize Illegal Immigrants’ College Education
3 - Sleeper
Cells in the USA
How many more Americans will die because of politics, trade and the American Communist Lawyers Union (ACLU)?
1
- Illegal Immigrant Charged With Murder in Virginia
2 - Hit-and-run
illegals held in valet's death: "Authorities said Thursday that four people arrested in connection with the hit-and-run death of parking valet Jose Medina are in the country illegally — and one was moments away from returning to Mexico when she was caught and pulled off a plane."
3 - Three
Illegal Immigrants Accused in Death of American Teen
Top award for rotten politician who openly thumbs his nose at our immigration laws:
Gov.
Kills Immigration Laws In Name Of Economic Growth (Chaffee is a career political animal). He should be arrested:
"Just a few days on the job, Democrat
Lincoln Chafee wasted no time issuing executive orders to accommodate illegal aliens, assuring that "RI can grow economically by being a tolerant place to do business.
He also took action so that “immigrant-rich areas” could prosper throughout the
state, which has an estimated 40,000 illegal aliens mingled in its population
of a little over 1 million."
Where is the outcry from the people in Rhode Island who have no job? Where is the outcry from the people in RI? Are they proud their governor is a lawbreaker?
|
