Lindsey Graham: 'Birthright Citizenship Is A Mistake,' 'We Should Change Constitution' (VIDEO)

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) says that the United States should end its policy of guaranteeing citizenship to the children of undocumented immigrants as ensured by the 14th amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

The South Carolina Senator defined his stance on the immigration issue on Wednesday in an interview with Fox News host Greta Van Susteren.

"Birthright citizenship I think is a mistake," explained Graham. "We should change our Constitution and say if you come here illegally and you have a child, that child's automatically not a citizen."

Graham signaled his intent to introduce a constitutional amendment to change the existing immigration law as it stands today.

"People come here to have babies," argued the Republican lawmaker. "They come here to drop a child. It's called "drop and leave. To have a child in America, they cross the border, they go to the emergency room, have a child, and that child's automatically an American citizen. That shouldn't be the case. That attracts people here for all the wrong reasons."

Graham dismissed the notion that his position is in any way controversial.

"I'm a practical guy, but when you go forward, I don't want 20 million more 20 years from now," he explained. "I want to be fair. I want to be humane. We need immigration policy, but it should be on our terms, not someone else's. I don't know how to fix it all. But I do know what makes people mad, that 12 million people came here, and there seems to be no system to deal with stopping 20 million 20 years from now."

WATCH:

Comments

[ReedYoung]

08:04 PM on 08/11/2010

Lindsey Graham is a mistake. The Constitution should be changed to take away HIS citizenship.

[jsgaetano]

03:26 AM on 08/02/2010

And right here is a clear demonstration that Republicans want to take away our guns.

First they repeal the 17th Amendment, then they repeal the 10th Amendment. That gives them two precedents, including one instance of them repealing part of the Bill Of Rights.

At that point, they'll take away the 2nd Amendment, and make sure only their Young Republicans and other Schutzstaffel members are allowed to own firearms. But since most of the major gun nuts in the Gooper party have already signed "loyalty oaths" to the GOP, they'll obviously be allowed to participate fully armed in the Conservative Culture of Corruption.

[Rangergirl]

08:46 PM on 08/01/2010

Lindsey is on CNN right now saying that Imigration is broken, needs to be fixed. If we can get Dems and Repubs in a room together we can fix it. Good old fashioned horse trading. Where has he been the last 20 months? The party of No will just say no again.. Hoping to win the majority in November. They could care less about this Country. All business is grinding to a halt because of their No to everything. Even helping small businesses with loans. I thought they wanted to help the common folk? No way.

[LJIESQ]

06:37 PM on 08/01/2010

Senator, if we can't get the requisite number of states to ratify the idea that we should not treat women like dogs, how in the world would you get this change ratified? Why is it Republicans always fall back on changing this treasured document? Oh yeah, that's right, politics by politicians.

[ThinkCreeps]

10:37 AM on 08/01/2010

Maybe we should change the constitution - then we could exclude the Graham family.

[TRex86]

10:11 AM on 08/01/2010

But for Hispanic immigrants and their high birthrate we will have negative population growth and no tax base in 30-40 years. I realize the Republicans like to stir up the parterres with phony issues, but I'm amazed at their inability to look over the horizon--politically or demographically. Why antagonize the fastest growing segment ofthe population? Why welcome the pending apocalypse when the USA is transformed to working Hispanics and Asians paying taxes to support old white people? Are they so enthralled with the Corporatocracy that they just think of the next quarter?

What we desperately need is adult behavior from both parties. Clinton flirted with it when he balanced the budget and initiated a plan to pay down the debt by 2007. His longer term target was the entitlements, which will run aground in 20 years without stronger financing (especially Medicare).

Modest proposals:
1. Pump money into the economy to force job creation.
2. Amnesty to all illegals.
3. Tax them (and their employers).
4. When unemployment hits 4% amortize all federal debt and the unfunded liabilities of the entitlements over the next 30 years.
5. Means test the entitlements.
6. Eliminate the payroll tax and fund all government programs withprogressive income taxes.
7. Phase out all income tax loopholes, including the tax preference for dividends, stock options and hedge funds.
8. Repeal the corporate income tax but require retained earnings not reinvested be paid as dividends.
9. Shrink the bloated defense budget to that of France.

[kevingiampa]

01:23 AM on 08/01/2010

How about we amend the 1st Amendment so that Lindsey Graham has to shut up. His idea is a mistake.

[1murillo]

12:52 AM on 08/01/2010

Graham is trying to out-Rand, Paul. Graham's "explanation" is a loony, obvious pander to fear-filled voters.

[Ogden192]

11:40 PM on 07/31/2010

No, we should not change the constitution.

Look at the California mess. It takes 66% vote to pass a budget, which obviously does not work, and disenfranchises the people who voted in the simple majority. But with 51% of the vote - or in the case of Prop 8 52%, having passed with 1% point to spare, you can VOTE IN discrimination into your constitution. Ye, that's what America stands for, discriminate against those minorities you don't like, because by definition, there is not enough of them to defend themselves on issues such as simple majority vote changes to the constitution.

Yes, I do know you cannot change the US constitution that easily. Let me have my rant, that particular one has been festering since the proposition made it onto the ballot, never mind the result of the vote.

[SeenItBefore]

11:39 PM on 07/31/2010

A friend, a Brit and married to an American gave birth to her children in Mexico as they both worked there. The children were given the option of being listed as British, American or Mexican by birthright. She chose Mexican, reasoning that Mexico hadn't invaded a country, well, ever, so her son would be free of the warlords in the USA.

Most countries worldwide grant citizenship as a birthright.

Lindsey, we had such high hope fer ye.

Sigh.

[One more Thing]

11:21 PM on 07/31/2010

Republicans claim they are for small and less government. Lindsey's proposed change would vastly increase the size of government and involve the government in maternity wards at every hospital in the country!

[Birdman]

11:40 PM on 07/31/2010

Republicans make all kinds of claims, which are partly true in this case what they are really for is less government for Big businesses esepcially ones that give them millions.

[zooperman]

10:22 PM on 07/31/2010

The constitution is a sacred document to Republicans - except the parts that help the brown skins and less fortunate.

[Birdman]

11:42 PM on 07/31/2010

unless it gets in the way of their agenda, remember the statement by Bush that it was nothing more than a quaint piece of paper... Because it was stopping him from becoming King.

[Ogden192]

11:45 PM on 07/31/2010

And they can't even see that that is what they are doing. Interesting article that I read the other day discussed how very limited is the remaining time for the white majority. Sigh, I like Lindsey Graham, except that he keeps saying these Gawd awful things.

[kaptaintripps]

10:15 PM on 07/31/2010

Yeah, Lindsey. Let's just tear the whole d@mned Constitution apart and start over. That's what you religious ReThugs REALLY want--isn't it? Let's just remake us into a Chr!st!an Nation with "gawd on our side." (And, oh yeah, which gawd, Lindsey...?)

[TimSultan]

09:32 PM on 07/31/2010

So the Constitution is sacred if we're talking about the 2nd Amendment, but not the 14th?
Amendment 14
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.

[Ogden192]

11:46 PM on 07/31/2010

Well, go you.

[Dunkleberger Karl]

03:17 AM on 08/03/2010

I love when my hunting Buddies tell me the 2nd amendment is th most importat, but when I ask"how you gonna know when them is collecting guns,and taking Riffles away from citizens?"They often reply " We'll hear about it on Fox News!

[Ohioliberal]

08:56 PM on 07/31/2010

The heart of the matter is does this clause encourages illegality by illegal aliens? If so, no one should benefit or profit from illegal acts - that's fundemental to our laws. I would support a narrowly written revision to close that loophole. What do other countries / societies (that we admire) do?

[Ogden192]

11:47 PM on 07/31/2010

They grant citizenship to all persons born within their borders, but they also have universal healthcare, so what do they know, right?