0 votes

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."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jctte9Zzu9g&feature=player_em...




Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

First men have to honor it.

then , maybe we could think about change.

The 14th amendment is being misread.

It grants citizenship to people born in the US and "subject to the jurisdiction thereof".

What did "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" mean. It meant at that time, not subject to the jurisdiction of another nation. A person born in the US to foreign parents is subject to the jurisdiction of that foreign country, not subject to the jurisdiction of the US.

Research what the writers of the 14th amendment had to say about what they were writing.

No new amendment is needed; all that is needed is a Supreme Court that can think, read, and is willing to enforce the Constitution as it is written. Unfortunately we do not have such a Supreme Court.

"Bend over and grab your ankles" should be etched in stone at the entrance to every government building and every government office.

You'll be waiting into eternity.

No new amendment is needed; all that is needed is a Supreme Court that can think, read, and is willing to enforce the Constitution as it is written. Unfortunately we do not have such a Supreme Court. QUOTE

We will never have a Supreme Court that will ever enforce the Constitution as written.
The 18th century is gone, never to return. If the court did what you want, most of the federal government would cease to exist.
It's a pipedream to think the court will set things right. Waiting for change from them is waiting for no change at all.
Explicitly changing the definition of citizenship has been long needed.
PS It doesn't matter what the writers of the 14th amendment said or wanted. The Courts interpret it as they see fit NOW.

Linsdsey Graham Has About As Much Credibility As A...

wet dishrag...

He'll vote for amnesty in a red hot second because he's probably being blackmailed for his secret er...closeted activities...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z_dUvVcBQFU

right on

right on

Follow me on Twitter for breaking news from a libertarian perspective

www.twitter.com/AbolishTheFed