Below The Beltway

I believe in the free speech that liberals used to believe in, the economic freedom that conservatives used to believe in, and the personal freedom that America used to believe in.

Arizona Governor: I Don’t Care If Your Child Is A Citizen, Get `Em The Hell Out Of Here

by @ 9:22 am on June 13, 2010. Filed under Immigration, Individual Liberty, Politics

Yet another reason to dislike the State of Arizona:

20 Responses to “Arizona Governor: I Don’t Care If Your Child Is A Citizen, Get `Em The Hell Out Of Here”

  1. Rob Miles says:

    I watched the video, waiting for the part where she says “I don’t care if your child is a citizen, get ‘em the hell out of here”, but didn’t see it. Oh, I get it: that was your interpretation of what she actually said. Fair enough.

    There’s something wrong with immigration laws when a child born to illegal immigrants is considered a legal citizen, but apparently that is our laws. That doesn’t change the status of the illegal immigrants, though, nor should it. I can’t imagine any other country that regulates immigration (no, the US isn’t the only one) would allow such a loophole.

    So let’s say, just for fun, that we are going to follow our laws concerning illegal immigrants: what options do you have with the children? They could leave with the parents, or the children could stay in the country, either in a foster home or with relatives who are here legally. The children are (by our current laws) legal citizens, and they can return at any time. I don’t see the problem here.

  2. Rob Miles says:

    Oh, geez. “…that is our laws.” What. The. Hell. Can I blame that on the drinking I did last night?

  3. someone says:

    You guys really need to think about this. more then 70% of Arizona is happy with this law. HOW THE HELL ARE YOU going to defend the fact that they are ILLEGAL!!!! If they are not afraid of it then became a LEGAL AMERICAN, STOP WASTING OUR TAXES.

  4. I think an immigration reform plan that includes some kind of guest worker program and a path to legalization for people here illegally is necessary

  5. Someone,

    The fact that the majority supports something doesn’t make it right

  6. Grace Suarez says:

    Actually, Rob, that someone born in the US is a citizen is not a mere immigration law. It’s baked right into the Constitution.

  7. beaubrummel says:

    In most countries an individuals birth decides their citizenship. This is simple and fair. It is the responsibility of the parent not the state to decide what to do with their child. If they abandon them, there by giving up that right. Then Ideally a private group would facilitate there placement somewhere. In reality it would then fall to the state. However, that child is a citizen and deserving of all the rights and privileges that

  8. Rob Miles says:

    Grace, I would argue that the Constitution merely confers natural citizenship status on a child born to legal immigrants. It doesn’t address children born to illegal immigrants in America.

    In any event, I recognize the child is a legal American citizen in those cases. That doesn’t change the parents’ status.

  9. Rob,

    The plain language of Section 1 does not say what you want it to as the Supreme Court ruled in Wong Kim Ark

  10. Joe Mama says:

    There already is a path to legalization for illegal immigrants, it’s called crossing the border before giving birth.

  11. Rob Miles says:

    Doug, I’ve conceded the point of the children being US citizens.

  12. dougisalawyer says:

    look at the people behind some of this. la raza (the race) is a hate group. they honestly think that southwestern usa belongs to them. that they don’t even have spaniard blood in them, they’re the true natives of america. they won’t be happy with a guest worker program or path to legal citizenship. they get on tv with a smile on their face and talk about comprehensive reform, but it’s a facade. they’re a hate organization. simple as. they want to kill whitey, it’s their agenda. they want to impale whitey along the southwest corridor like jose vlad the impaler. they won’t stop until whitey is dead.

    seriously though. illegal immigrants needs to tell each other to quit getting behind the wheel in vehicles much larger than them wasted. it doesn’t do them any favors when across the usa they get into wrecks drunk, with no insurance. then take off back to mexico when someone dies. 5 incidents of those have occurred in the small city i live in.

  13. dougisalawyer says:

    btw, some of these la raza people are as nuts as some of the people who think we invented aids and implanted crack in inner cities to kill black people. they teach some crazy stuff about the “white devil”

    ok. have a good day. kill whitey!

  14. Steve says:

    In the land of the free there is no immigration legislation.

  15. Zoot Sputnik says:

    Uhhh… Doug, violent crime and property in Arizona theft is at it’s lowest in decades. For some reason I think if La Raza was on a kill whitey crusade there would be more, y’know, dead people.

  16. douglasisalawyer says:

    the la raza group doesn’t correlate to theft or deaths, or anything of the sorts. it’s an organization that’s INSANE! they allocate a lot of capital for amnesty and open borders. like i said you could do immigration reform, but that’ll only make them half way happy. they want OPEN BORDERS! they cook their books on illegal immigration to satisfy their own claims.

    i legally came to america, so did my father. sure it helped that my mother was from here. we still had to fill out the paperwork and pay for an immigration attorney, not one paid by the american taxpayer! we also paid our filing fees. point is – do it the right way. tons of people from countries like europe are sent home because they overstayed their visas, even when they have jobs, pay taxes and get no form of welfare. you can’t say latin americans you’re special, everyone else just sucks.

  17. douglasisalawyer says:


    yeah, get everyone on the same page as you, then that could be possible. in order for a country to remain solvent it has to be sovereign. if you disagree, check out somalia.

  18. zone says:

    States struggling financially have reason to be irate with Federal Government for letting this thing get where it is.
    One heavy impact of illegal immigration is to state taxpayers.
    Jan asks Obama why is it that her state is not being reimbursed a larger percentage of the real cost of supporting these people.
    As an example of how Federal Government deal with costs, look no further than the BP oil spill. BP will be paying.
    States did not bring on this flood of illegal aliens. They are not even allowed to stop it.
    So, if anything it is the Federal Government that should be picking up the tab, whatever it is.

    Lastly we hear all the time that there is no way we could send them all back.
    Well, as I hear it they have been leaving Arizona in droves, of their own accord, no charge.

  19. tfr says:

    Perhaps this should be an amendment to the Constitution which we should consider. It was great having immigrants coming in back when North America was wide open, with plenty of room for millions. It’s not really like that anymore. This really is something the founders didn’t consider – they thought it might take 500 years to fully populate North America.

  20. Scott says:

    It’s not so much about what the law is or what the constitution said a few hundred years ago. Things have changed. At one point, it was beneficial to the country to let as many in as it could. People can buy property, pay taxes, bring their own skill set, help cities flourish, spread west, etc. They used to call it manifest destiny. It’s what helped the country grow to what it is, a modern 1st world country with suburbs as far as the eye can see. Even our slums have high standards compared to what I’ve seen in other countries, so far anyway. But if the founders where here today, I think they would be concerned with our pace, if we can handle it, and what happens if we can’t. From having enough resources, to the effects of urban sprawl, to turning suburbs into cities and cities into slums, there’s plenty of variables to consider with an ever increasing population, which our immigration policy affects.

    Changing whether or not someone born here to “illegal” immigrants makes them an automatic citizen might be worth considering. It’s about as dumb as a burglar injuring himself in the victim’s home, then suing the victim and winning. I’m not sure the founders would go for it though, as we don’t get to choose where we’re born. It’s more than a little slippery ground. That’s something Helen Thomas doesn’t seem to get. At the least, remove the benefits and loopholes of having an anchor baby. Perhaps only give the U.S. born babies of illegals some sort of partial citizenship until age 18. It doesn’t have to be black and white like the teabaggers (get out!) and bleeding hearts (come on in!) suggest. There’s plenty of ‘grey area’ solutions that would be an improvement to what we have, without going too far.

[Below The Beltway is proudly powered by WordPress.]