Gachnar for America
Verbatim Ron Paul ad: 'Repeal birthright citizenship!'
That's right, kids, Paul wants to repeal part (if not all) of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, the one that says that '[a]ll 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.' This was, of course of course, the amendment that made slaves born in the United States US citizens, thus vacating the Supreme Court's ruling in Dred Scott. Paul's objection to it no doubt is connected to what anti-immigration activists call 'anchor babies'- US citizen children born to illegal immigrants, who can then petition to have their parents become legal permanent residents and, eventually, US citizens. What those activists don't consider is that those parents are still deportable; in order to gain US citizenship they would have to leave the United States, usually for a 10 year period, then go through consular processing (usually taking 1-2 years) then wait another five years to apply for citizenship. That's IF they succeed in consular processing, which they sometimes won't. What this means is that 'anchor babies', as they are invoked by anti-immigrationists, are effectively a myth. If you enter the US illegally, you have to have a really exceptionally good reason not to be deported, and a young child usually isn't enough. (See, for example, Elvira Arellano.)
The 14th amendment continues to the Equal Protection Clause, which states that 'no state shall ... deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.' The Equal Protection Clause has been the basis for countless progressive Supreme Court decisions - Strauder v. West Virginia (overturning a state law that prohibited blacks from serving on juries), Brown v. Board of Education (mandating racial integration of segregated school districts) and most recently, Lawrence v. Texas (overturning anti-sodomy laws). No doubt Paul doesn't approve of these decisions either, seeing as how they limit the power of the states.
The point is, eliminating the first clause of the 14th Amendment would eliminate a number of important humans rights advances made in the last 140 years and reestablish an underclass of persons not protected by the Constitution. Children born to immigrant parents; racial, ethnic or religious minorities; gay and transgendered persons; all would be at the mercy of the electorate in the state they lived in. Without the Equal Protection Clause, imagine how many more lynchings would be allowed under color of law; imagine how much worse the racial or economic divides in our nation would be. Ron Paul wants to take our country back in time, and the destination he has in mind is a darker, crueler era that most of us wouldn't recognize.
That's right, kids, Paul wants to repeal part (if not all) of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, the one that says that '[a]ll 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.' This was, of course of course, the amendment that made slaves born in the United States US citizens, thus vacating the Supreme Court's ruling in Dred Scott. Paul's objection to it no doubt is connected to what anti-immigration activists call 'anchor babies'- US citizen children born to illegal immigrants, who can then petition to have their parents become legal permanent residents and, eventually, US citizens. What those activists don't consider is that those parents are still deportable; in order to gain US citizenship they would have to leave the United States, usually for a 10 year period, then go through consular processing (usually taking 1-2 years) then wait another five years to apply for citizenship. That's IF they succeed in consular processing, which they sometimes won't. What this means is that 'anchor babies', as they are invoked by anti-immigrationists, are effectively a myth. If you enter the US illegally, you have to have a really exceptionally good reason not to be deported, and a young child usually isn't enough. (See, for example, Elvira Arellano.)
The 14th amendment continues to the Equal Protection Clause, which states that 'no state shall ... deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.' The Equal Protection Clause has been the basis for countless progressive Supreme Court decisions - Strauder v. West Virginia (overturning a state law that prohibited blacks from serving on juries), Brown v. Board of Education (mandating racial integration of segregated school districts) and most recently, Lawrence v. Texas (overturning anti-sodomy laws). No doubt Paul doesn't approve of these decisions either, seeing as how they limit the power of the states.
The point is, eliminating the first clause of the 14th Amendment would eliminate a number of important humans rights advances made in the last 140 years and reestablish an underclass of persons not protected by the Constitution. Children born to immigrant parents; racial, ethnic or religious minorities; gay and transgendered persons; all would be at the mercy of the electorate in the state they lived in. Without the Equal Protection Clause, imagine how many more lynchings would be allowed under color of law; imagine how much worse the racial or economic divides in our nation would be. Ron Paul wants to take our country back in time, and the destination he has in mind is a darker, crueler era that most of us wouldn't recognize.