Jon Kyl Wants Hearing On 14th Amendment 'Birthright Citizenship'

On Sunday, Sen. John Kyl (R-Ariz.) became the highest-ranking Republican to suggest support for the repeal of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Appearing on CBS' Face the Nation, Kyl said that he opposes allowing children of undocumented immigrants to be granted U.S. citizenship and wants Congress to hold hearings on the matter.

In doing so, the Senate's no. 2 Republican didn't place himself on the extreme wing of his party's stance on immigration policy. Rather, he joined what is a growing movement that could very well shape the official policy planks of the GOP.

(A Kyl spokesperson told CBS News on Monday that he supports hearings into the issue, "he did not call for the 'repeal' of the 14th Amendment.")

There are already a number of Republican officials who have preceded Kyl in calling for a reworking of the country's citizenship laws. Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) has proposed the piece of legislation that would repeal the 14th Amendment.

An aide to Graham said that there had been no formal dates set for hearings or the bill's introduction. "Senator Graham threw this out there on Fox News and it is something that he has been talking about in South Carolina as well," the aide said. But there was growing talk and legislative activity around the concept.

In the House, Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Tex.) has introduced the Birthright Citizenship Act of 2009, which would attempt to deny children of illegal immigrants U.S. citizenship through statute rather than a constitutional amendment (thereby lowering the vote threshold). He has 93 co-sponsors for that effort including Rep. Nathan Deal, the Georgia Republican who is in a runoff to be the party's candidate for governor.

Senate candidate Rand Paul (R-Ky.) caused a stir shortly after winning his primary by saying he supported stripping citizenship from children of the undocumented. Former congressman and potential Colorado gubernatorial candidate Tom Tancredo -- one of the staunchest anti-illegal immigration voices in national politics -- has made repeal of the 14th Amendment a major cause.

There are many obscure Republican candidates who have made the same proposal, including Kevin Craig in Missouri and Gary McLeod (an obscure Christian conservative who is challenging -- without much hope -- Majority Whip James Clyburn).

But what may be most telling about the 14th amendment repeal campaign -- the element that suggests it could be a major philosophical force within the Republican Party -- are its roots. Well before it became en vogue for Republicans to advocate fundamental change in citizenship laws, the idea was being bandied about among the intellectual bastions of the conservative movement. The Heritage Foundation produced a report on the matter in 2006. And Fred Thompson -- back when he was igniting a whisper campaign that he was the one Republican with the intellectual heft to run for president -- was talking about repealing the 14th amendment back in 2007.

"I think that law was created at another time and place for valid reasons," said the former U.S. senator from Tennessee. "It probably needs to be revisited."

UPDATE: An earlier version of this story, echoing previous reports at other sites, listed Rep. Jack Kimble (R-Calif) as a co-sponsor of House legislation. Kimble is a fictional person. His name, obviously, has been removed.

Comments

[JimHHoutz]

05:46 PM on 08/18/2010

This entire issue shows what happens when people address a problem by attempting to solve symptoms rather than addressing the core issue. The core issue is illegal immigration,
and the need to solve the problem by controlling our border. Solve the issue of border control and the primary problem of “anchor babies” is significantly diminished. The issue of
“anchor babies” for people with work permits and or people who are here working towards citizenship should be addressed in a comprehensive immigration bill. Visit my blog www.allamericanentrepreneur.com.

[ehorth]

04:48 PM on 09/21/2010

Actually, I'd say that the :core issue" is why are they coming here to begin with? The core issue is that change needs to occur in Mexico, Costa Rica, Nicaragua, Guatemala, etc. That the average person feels like they can have a decent life and future in their own country. That they know their laws work and they have a reasonable expectation of daily living without corruption. Putting a plug on a border is never going to be the answer to stem the force of people trying to find a way out of the bad situation they're in.

[sjpersonal]

01:46 PM on 08/16/2010

Again!!!!
How would one go about obtaining accurate states on the activity of a group of people that they are unable to track? Here are the numbrs and links regarding the number of children born to illegals in 2008.
======================================
the number of children born in the United States to illegal immigrants rose from 2.7 million in 2003 to 4 million in 2008.

Link: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/04/14/AR2009041401433.html

The study, which analyzed census statistics, found that US-born children now account for 73 percent of all children of illegal immigrants. And children of illegal immigrants - including those born overseas - now account for 6.8 percent of elementary and secondary school students nationwide and more than 1 in 10 students in Arizona, California, Colorado, Nevada and Texas.

Link: http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2009/04/15/number_of_children_born_to_illegal_immigrants_jumps/

[Chucklee]

05:21 PM on 08/12/2010

Well, again this is the country made, shaped by the illegal immigrants, who came here and grabbed the assets of the native Indians living peacefully (barring the legal immigrants coming in now a days, they are earning score of money in taxes to this country).

All those now Americans, except native Indians and the legal immigrants (now in US), are eligible to be ported. This includes all the senators and others who are talking about illegal immigrants' baby citizen rights. They themselves are the first anchor babies. They should look into their ancestory/lineage and decide what they are. Are they purest of pure American - NAH, they are the first illegals by their own standards, and should be first stripped of their citizenship.

They all "talking of illegal immigrants and that"are like a thief is saying - hey look they are stealing.

Why don't they talk of stopping war and save that money and secure country from here itself instead of going for mindless wars and wasting money. And when coffers got depleted because of their misdeeds, they talk about illegals utilizimg their resources and being burden....That is minscule in comparison to the trillions of dollars being doled out in the mindless wars elsewhere in the world.

Stop that nonsense and talk straight, don't try befool people about your misdeeds in the garb of being their protectors, just by talking about illegals. Stop, secure the borders by wisely investing tax payers money.

That's here it should start......you illegals progeny.

[awlff]

07:05 AM on 08/08/2010

Immigration has nothing to do with any real issues facing America.Stop the wars,stop giving our money to corporations,stop our government from taking bribes to give wasteful contracts.Then we will have all the money for health care,jobs,and alternative fuels.They have tricked people into thinking the crumbs are worth fighting over.They are not.Trillions of dollars are spent on the wars and giving the rich and oil companies tax breaks and other subsidies.That is the money and those are the laws that really matter.The propaganda over immigrants is something that governments and crazy people have used through out history to unite a demographic and mobilize them for political and economic power.Recognize the distorted thinking and denial of fellow human beings their rights to assuage your feelings of ownership and fear.

[Tucson911]

05:29 PM on 08/09/2010

Who do you think you are fooling? Immigartion has EVERYTHING to do with the quality of life in Tucson, AZ. Just come to the front lines and try to get into a hospital, or watch your taxes go up evary year to pay for the illegal influx. Finally, two years ago we clamped-down on the employers resulting in our illegals going to California... (that is the reason crime dropped a little that past couple years).

[awlff]

05:08 PM on 08/10/2010

I think I fool no one.
I lived 20 years in Phoenix.I went to Tucson frequently.The college students and immigrants are very polite and friendly.Sorry I missed you! In my 20 years in Phoenix Mexican immigrants were the most friendly,loyal, and law abiding people I knew.It was a privilege to know and work with them.

[bryanzth]

03:05 PM on 08/05/2010

This is interesting:

"Dred Scott (1799 – 1858), was a slave in the United States who sued unsuccessfully for his freedom in the infamous Dred Scott v. Sandford case of 1857. He and his wife Harriet Scott were slaves, but followed his master and had lived in states and territories where slavery was illegal according to the state laws and the Northwest Ordinance of 1787, including Illinois and Minnesota. The United States Supreme Court ruled 7-2 against Scott, finding that neither he, nor any person of African ancestry, could claim citizenship in the United States, and that therefore Scott could not bring suit in federal court under diversity of citizenship rules." (edited text from Wiki page).

That is why we have the 14th Amendment. I don't want someone saying, no, you can't be a citizen, because blah blah blah.... even though you were born here.

BZ.

[ThirdSection]

11:41 PM on 08/05/2010

I think that wraps up the principle of the matter rather nicely.

[bryanzth]

11:53 PM on 08/05/2010

Yep, you bet. And another one for: "if you do not remember the past, it will repeat."

BZ.

[davcrock]

03:24 AM on 08/08/2010

Yes, and that has nothing to do with the question of whether illegal immigrants should be able to lever their way in by coming here and having anchor babies.

[ThirdSection]

02:12 PM on 08/05/2010

Say, isn't that the guy who played Al Bundy on 'Married with Children'?

[CarolinaYankee]

10:09 AM on 08/05/2010

The Sunbelt mafia..........

[Greg Bell]

02:31 AM on 08/05/2010

The origins of the 14th Amendment should give EVERYONE pause before even toying with the idea of repealing it (I won't restate the origins here - go look it up). It only states that ANYONE born here is automatically a citizen of both this country AND the state they reside in. It does not qualify that at all as to the status of your parents. Repeal would put EVERYONE'S citizenship in question and left up to the whim of whoever holds power nationally OR even on a state level at a particular time. Don't like liberals? Fine revoke their citizenship. Don't like conservatives? Ship 'em off (oh, if only I could!). Don't like browns, blacks, yellows, reds, whites, or those God forsaken PURPLES? You get the idea. The question that needs to be asked, and very quickly, is If birth on these shores does not confer citizenship...what (or more ominously) who does?

[bryanzth]

03:06 PM on 08/05/2010

Bravo, Greg!

Fanned and faved.

BZ.

[Tucson911]

05:35 PM on 08/09/2010

I guess we should remain the only country in the world that can't figure that out?

[TomAmitai]

12:55 AM on 08/05/2010

Whatever happened to all the talk about the Latino vote shifting to the Republicans, because they were "conservative", "religious", and "family oriented"? Republicans used to brag about their pols who are fluent in Spanish, like Jeb Bush. Now, immigrants, both legal and otherwise, are being portrayed as a menace to American culture. Is this the beginning of a new "Southwestern strategy"?

[Chassis]

01:10 AM on 08/05/2010

"otherwise"? the word is ILLEGAL which is what it is! Legal = good. Illegal = Illegal, what part of this simple equation don't you folks get???

[TomAmitai]

01:39 AM on 08/05/2010

I "don't get" why people who are willing to work should be tossed out of the country because they didn't abide by the racist quotas which prevented them from legally crossing an imaginary man-made line on the earth.

[bryanzth]

03:09 PM on 08/05/2010

Citizen = Citizen. Citizen pulled off the street, pulled over because of skin color, bad. Because of shoes, worse, because of tight jeans, the worst.

Now, we know that undocumented visitors are a problem for you. But somehow, no one seems to identify the Eastern Europeans, the Africans, the Asians and those immigrant Native Americans as much as they do Latinos.

I want an explanation about that.

BZ.

[RonRutherford]

12:47 AM on 08/05/2010

This is going to backfire and hurt Kyl, there's certain districts out here that are pretty libertarian, and don't want to hear this type of nonsense. Even many that strongly want something done about illegal immigration will NOT support this. He's trying to get credibility back with the base after supporting Kagan in the past, how he dealt with immigration last time around, etc.

I wish the LP stood a chance out here for one of the Senate seats. I'm so sick of McCain and Kyl. My congressman Jeff Flake is one of the best, a republican. He's been interviewed by Bill Maher, check it out sometime... that's real AZ conservatism, not the way we're being presented recently by the actions of some.

www.therationalreport.com

[TomAmitai]

01:49 AM on 08/05/2010

So, you think that "real AZ conservatism" is best represented by a Flake?

[General Public]

12:14 AM on 08/05/2010

The 14th Amendment is the basis for many of the freedoms we enjoy today, and nobody who supports repealing it should have any place in our politics. Without it, the government could deny citizenship to certain people or groups of people for political reasons, which is exactly why the citizenship guarantee was put into it in the first place. The 14th Amendment has several clauses including the equal protection clause and brought us many civil rights advances like desegregation. Opposing it is un-American. What kind of politician would want to remove one of the foundations of our liberty? These Republican Teabaggers make me sick. If the 14th Amendment actually were revoked so that citizenship can be denied on a whim and I somehow became President, I could decide to deny citizenship to all Teabaggers and conservative Republicans because they don't deserve it, after having advocated for having their own freedoms removed. Yet that is exactly why we need the 14th Amendment there, to protect the people from having their rights violated for political reasons! Even the people who don't seem to deserve protection get equal protection under the law, which was the intention of the authors of that amendment, who were very wise indeed.

[Tucson911]

05:39 PM on 08/09/2010

Nobody has proposed repeal of 14th. They are suggesting the supreme court decide if it was originally designed to include illegals. Nothing too hard to understand about that!

[Chucklee]

04:59 PM on 08/12/2010

Well who are now in America are ancestors of illegals, they are the first to be ported out of country, like Linsay Graham and all who are here.

Their forefathers came and even murdered and grabbed the asstes of Native Indians here. Shouldn't they be dealt with first. This will go on peeling after peeling if you try to go deep and decide who is legal....

[forte88]

12:05 AM on 08/05/2010

And they say Obama is shredding the constitution? WTF?

[Shoryland]

11:48 PM on 08/04/2010

This is about far more than Mexicans.

This is about surrendering the right of citizenship to the whim of government.

That's what the Republicans want: to be able to take away anyone's citizenship, declare them an enemy combatant, and ship them off to Gitmo.

This is the 14th Amendment: “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.”

Repeal that and then explain to me who gets citizenship. Don't know? Exactly.

[JAMjr]

12:41 AM on 08/05/2010

Marked as favorite though I vehemently deny your claim that Republicans want to take away anyone's citizenship. I have yet to hear any verifiable statement from any elected official advocating the repeal of the 14th amendment. The 14th amendment is far too important to our individual rights as citizens. An attempt to repeal it en total would be a disaster. Trying to amend the Constitution to prevent someone from attaining citizenship (that is different than taking citizenship away) is not likely to get the support it would take to get it to pass.

[Shoryland]

07:31 AM on 08/05/2010

JAMjr,

The Iowa GOP adopted a Thirteenther plank with the express intent of stripping the citizenship of the President of the United States for accepting the Nobel Peace Prize:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/07/29/iowa-gop-embraces-plan-to_n_663621.html

Joe Lieberman (not a Republican but definitely one in spirit) introduced a bill that would strip the citizenship of terrorist SUSPECTS:

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0510/36741.html

Thanks for marking as favorite.

[tarballs]

10:38 PM on 08/04/2010

I have wittnessed the way congress was coerced into the Iraq war.
If there is a profit to be made of the repeal of 14 it would fly, but there is no money to be made,
so the ancor babies will be citizens even if morally wrong..(Getting pregnant without a reason or doctor or way to support the offspring etc)...
Thank heavens for gated communities !!!

[TomAmitai]

01:19 AM on 08/05/2010

If people who can't afford to care for their children didn't have any, who would mow the lawns or clean the houses in your gated community?

[awlff]

05:13 AM on 08/06/2010

Hope you don't have any Mexican security guards.

[dr-steve-pesyk]

09:27 PM on 08/04/2010

And just to clarify the jurisdictional issue I see cropping up here,
U.S. versus Hudson, among other items, contra-distinguishes the several
types of jurisdiction and their effects :
Jurisdiction over person,
jurisdiction of property,
jurisdiction over subject matter,
jurisdiction over geography.
Co-joining this with my previous post,
what conclusions can be reached about the Fourteenth ?