D L X
Topic Author
Posts: 11701
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

Best Reason Against Changing The 14th Amendment

Thu Aug 12, 2010 5:29 pm

The best reason against changing the 14th Amendment to deny citizenship to someone whose parents entered the country illegally is,

How are you going to determine years later whether someone is a citizen or not?

Situation ONE:

Picture this major problem: Lorenzo is born in Texas. He grows up in America. He thinks he's American. He's got a birth certificate, a social security number, eats apple pie, sings country music, and even roots for the Redskins, because screw Dallas. When he turns 18, he applies to college, and gets in. He submits a financial aid request, because with his parents both now deceased, he has the brains for college, but not the money. The government audits his request, and challenges his US Citizenship. They allege that he was born from illegal aliens, and therefore does not have US Citizenship. And without citizenship, not only does he not get financial aid, but he might get deported - deported to a country he has never even known.

How is Lorenzo going to prove his parents were legally in the country when he was born? Any evidence of such, if it ever existed, is LOOOONG gone.

Situation TWO:

Same basic facts: Lorenzo is born in Texas, grows up in America, has a birth certificate and a social security number. his parents die before he is accepted into college. He applies for financial aid, and the government audits his request. They strongly suspect that he is not a citizen because they think his parents were not legally present when he was born. If they give him aid when he's not a citizen, aid that could have gone to someone else might not get there. How are they going to prove that Lorenzo's parents were in the country illegally? Any evidence of such, if it ever existed, is LOOOONG gone.

Situation THREE:

Same facts, but Lorenzo casts a vote in an election, along with thousands of other Latinos. Turns out, it's a close race, and the candidate who stands to lose challenges the voter rolls, demanding proof that every person with a Latin-sounding name that voted be investigated for citizenship. Because, if they're not a citizen, they should not have been allowed to vote. How would a candidate prove Lorenzo and others are not citizens? How would Lorenzo and others prove that they are?


Altering the 14th Amendment to end birthright citizenship opens the door to challenging someone's citizenship years later, but when there is little or no evidence to argue either way. The rule should stay the same for one reason: it's EASY! Citizenship is a big deal! It should be extremely easy and unmistakable that someone is a citizen. Hospital records and birth certificates are incredibly easy ways to prove citizenship, and thus it should remain so. Otherwise, you'll have an unenforceable rule.
 
User avatar
DocLightning
Posts: 20154
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

RE: Best Reason Against Changing The 14th Amendment

Thu Aug 12, 2010 5:53 pm

Quoting D L X (Thread starter):

Picture this major problem: Lorenzo is born in Texas. He grows up in America. He thinks he's American. He's got a birth certificate, a social security number, eats apple pie, sings country music, and even roots for the Redskins, because screw Dallas. When he turns 18, he applies to college, and gets in. He submits a financial aid request, because with his parents both now deceased, he has the brains for college, but not the money. The government audits his request, and challenges his US Citizenship. They allege that he was born from illegal aliens, and therefore does not have US Citizenship. And without citizenship, not only does he not get financial aid, but he might get deported - deported to a country he has never even known.

How is Lorenzo going to prove his parents were legally in the country when he was born? Any evidence of such, if it ever existed, is LOOOONG gone.

The law needs to be set up to give the benefit of the doubt to the individual. Once a birth certificate has been given and a SSN granted, it cannot be rescinded. The determination of citizenship needs to be done at birth. Once you are a citizen, it cannot be withdrawn unless it can be shown that YOU provided fraudulent information. Not your parents.

This is exactly what is done in other countries, like Mexico. BEFORE the birth certificate is granted, the parents need to demonstrate their citizenship. Once the baby is given the birth certificate and SSN, then it's over.

In other words, the way that the country needs to work is as follows: Lorenzo's parents appear in a hospital. They are illegal immigrants. She is in labor. Lorenzo is born. He is given a birth certificate but no SSN. The Mexican consulate is contacted and informed that a Mexican national has given birth in a U.S. hospital and that they should process the newborn's paperwork. The family is then deported to Mexico.

Suppose that the parents, being saavy, refuse to admit that they are Mexican citizens and refuse to state their names or nationality. In that case, then Lorenzo is an American citizen. He is removed from his parents and placed in foster care, and they are either incarcerated or deported, depending on whether they can be identified.

I guarantee you that given the choice between deportation and losing the baby entirely, very few people will enter the country illegally to have kids. But the determination of citizenship needs to be done AT BIRTH and once it's done, there needs to be a "no double jeopardy" rule.

That's exactly what countries without "birthright" rules do.
-Doc Lightning-

"The sky calls to us. If we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars."
-Carl Sagan
 
sw733
Posts: 5310
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2004 6:19 am

RE: Best Reason Against Changing The 14th Amendment

Thu Aug 12, 2010 5:55 pm

Quoting D L X (Thread starter):
How are you going to determine years later whether someone is a citizen or not?

Most countries in the world do NOT have jus soli, and they have no issues determining who is and who is not a citizen...the US is one of the rare countries that allows jus soli.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 1):
Once a birth certificate has been given and a SSN granted, it cannot be rescinded.

I agree, unless the person decides they no longer want to be a citizen (which is expensive now for an American to do!!)
 
sv7887
Posts: 1259
Joined: Tue May 20, 2008 7:31 pm

RE: Best Reason Against Changing The 14th Amendment

Thu Aug 12, 2010 6:28 pm

Quoting sw733 (Reply 2):
Most countries in the world do NOT have jus soli, and they have no issues determining who is and who is not a citizen...the US is one of the rare countries that allows jus soli.

A great point. My parents were British Citizens and when I was born in the US they had to register my birth at the British embassy in order to get me a British passport as well. IIRC the law soon changed (this was 1982) and it was not possible to get a British Passport if you weren't born there from then on.

Conversely at the time my parents were only H-1 visa holders when I was born in the USA. If my dad had lost his job or was denied a green card we would have had to leave the US. Luckily Textron was quite pleased with his work and got him a green card fairly quickly. Otherwise we would have had to go back to the UK.

There was an article about 8% of kids in the US being born to illegal immigrant families...That's the impetus for change.

Source:http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704216804575423641955803732.html
 
D L X
Topic Author
Posts: 11701
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

RE: Best Reason Against Changing The 14th Amendment

Thu Aug 12, 2010 6:38 pm

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 1):
The determination of citizenship needs to be done at birth.

Agreed.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 1):
BEFORE the birth certificate is granted, the parents need to demonstrate their citizenship.

Two problems with this: first, how would You go about showing your Citizenship? We don't got no national ID, and most Americans don't hold passports. Indeed, the way most Americans prove they are citizens is by showing a birth certificate, but we know that doesn't work anymore if the 14A is changed. .
Second, there are plenty of non-citizens that are not present within the country illegally. A Mexican national that crosses the bridge over the Rio Grande and passes through customs into Texas is here legally just as someone is who flies in from England (unless they overstay their visa). Same with a person holding a green card, like my former boss whose kid was born here in the US. Now, I can't claim to know what papers someone is given and required to keep to show that they are legally present in the country. But it should be noted that *no one* is saying that you can't be a citizen if your parents aren't citizens. That flies in Japan, but it would cause riots here in the US.

Quoting sv7887 (Reply 3):
There was an article about 8% of kids in the US being born to illegal immigrant families...

I saw that this morning too. That's actually what got me thinking about this, because that stat sure sounds sexy, right? That stat will push public opinion. So we really need to analyze what would happen if this change actually sees fruition.

(And it also makes me wonder, who all is included in that 8% figure? Does that include people who have overstayed a visa? It's certainly not all Mexicans.
 
sv7887
Posts: 1259
Joined: Tue May 20, 2008 7:31 pm

RE: Best Reason Against Changing The 14th Amendment

Thu Aug 12, 2010 6:42 pm

Quoting D L X (Reply 4):
(And it also makes me wonder, who all is included in that 8% figure? Does that include people who have overstayed a visa? It's certainly not all Mexicans.

Trust me a LOT of Indians are in that pool too. The media picks on the Mexicans a lot but they are not the only ones. It's pretty common for someone in the Indian community to sponsor their relative for a tourist visa, overstay and somehow get them married in the US. Pretty popular for Indians who come on a student visa and can't get jobs. Others just overstay and buy up a convenience store under a legal relative's name too...I know at least 5 people in the Boston area who've done this.
 
User avatar
DocLightning
Posts: 20154
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

RE: Best Reason Against Changing The 14th Amendment

Thu Aug 12, 2010 7:22 pm

Quoting D L X (Reply 4):

Two problems with this: first, how would You go about showing your Citizenship? We don't got no national ID, and most Americans don't hold passports. Indeed, the way most Americans prove they are citizens is by showing a birth certificate, but we know that doesn't work anymore if the 14A is changed. .

That is correct. A change in that amendment will probably require a national ID or some way to prove citizenship.

But also, any birth certificate granted before the change in the amendment would still be valid proof of citizenship.
-Doc Lightning-

"The sky calls to us. If we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars."
-Carl Sagan
 
Boeing1970
Posts: 334
Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2010 4:24 pm

RE: Best Reason Against Changing The 14th Amendment

Thu Aug 12, 2010 7:39 pm

Quoting D L X (Thread starter):
Picture this major problem: Lorenzo is born in Texas. He grows up in America. He thinks he's American. He's got a birth certificate, a social security number, eats apple pie, sings country music, and even roots for the Redskins, because screw Dallas. When he turns 18, he applies to college, and gets in. He submits a financial aid request, because with his parents both now deceased, he has the brains for college, but not the money. The government audits his request, and challenges his US Citizenship. They allege that he was born from illegal aliens, and therefore does not have US Citizenship. And without citizenship, not only does he not get financial aid, but he might get deported - deported to a country he has never even known.

If Lorenzos parents were citizens, there would be a record of it. This isn't the 1820's.

Quoting D L X (Thread starter):
Same basic facts: Lorenzo is born in Texas, grows up in America, has a birth certificate and a social security number. his parents die before he is accepted into college. He applies for financial aid, and the government audits his request. They strongly suspect that he is not a citizen because they think his parents were not legally present when he was born. If they give him aid when he's not a citizen, aid that could have gone to someone else might not get there. How are they going to prove that Lorenzo's parents were in the country illegally? Any evidence of such, if it ever existed, is LOOOONG gone.

Again, if Lorenzos parents were legally present, there would be a record of it. This isn't the 1820's.

Quoting D L X (Thread starter):
Same facts, but Lorenzo casts a vote in an election, along with thousands of other Latinos. Turns out, it's a close race, and the candidate who stands to lose challenges the voter rolls, demanding proof that every person with a Latin-sounding name that voted be investigated for citizenship. Because, if they're not a citizen, they should not have been allowed to vote. How would a candidate prove Lorenzo and others are not citizens? How would Lorenzo and others prove that they are?

How do you do so today?
 
D L X
Topic Author
Posts: 11701
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

RE: Best Reason Against Changing The 14th Amendment

Thu Aug 12, 2010 7:48 pm

Quoting Boeing1970 (Reply 7):
Again, if Lorenzos parents were legally present, there would be a record of it. This isn't the 1820's.

Not necessarily true, unless you can point me to such records. In fact, point me to where those records would be for a kid born 18 years ago.

Also, I want to make sure you're on the same page as me - legal presence means you went through customs, and haven't overstayed a visa. You don't have to be a citizen to be legally present and have a baby.

Quoting Boeing1970 (Reply 7):
How do you do so today?

You don't have ex post facto challenges to citizenship today. Birth certificates (and probably a photo ID) are enough to show that X. Jones is a citizen, and that you are X. Jones.
 
User avatar
Dreadnought
Posts: 9947
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 6:31 pm

RE: Best Reason Against Changing The 14th Amendment

Thu Aug 12, 2010 7:54 pm

Quoting D L X (Thread starter):
The best reason against changing the 14th Amendment to deny citizenship to someone whose parents entered the country illegally is,

How are you going to determine years later whether someone is a citizen or not?

Your best reason is a very poor reason. We would not make it retroactive. It would not be fair, and in fact I seem to recall that the Constitution prohibits retroactive laws like that.

But from the day of the amendment forwards, no more.

Quoting sw733 (Reply 2):
I agree, unless the person decides they no longer want to be a citizen (which is expensive now for an American to do!!)
Quoting D L X (Reply 4):
Two problems with this: first, how would You go about showing your Citizenship? We don't got no national ID, and most Americans don't hold passports. Indeed, the way most Americans prove they are citizens is by showing a birth certificate, but we know that doesn't work anymore if the 14A is changed. .

Which is why I am 100% in support of national ID cards. Those who resist the idea are just paranoid.

[Edited 2010-08-12 13:03:01]
You have enemies? Good. That means you've stood up for something, sometime in your life. - W. Churchill
 
D L X
Topic Author
Posts: 11701
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

RE: Best Reason Against Changing The 14th Amendment

Thu Aug 12, 2010 8:02 pm

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 9):
Your best reason is a very poor reason. We would not make it retroactive. It would not be fair, and in fact I seem to recall that the Constitution prohibits retroactive laws like that.

But from the day of the amendment forwards, no more.

I'm not talking ex post facto. I'm talking about a kid born after the amendment. (Though the corner case presents its own problem, but as you and Doc note, can be easily solved in favor of the kid.)

So, add that fact: Lorenzo is born after the 14A is amended to exclude children of people illegal in the country. Does that change your analysis?
 
windy95
Posts: 2660
Joined: Thu Dec 18, 2008 1:11 pm

RE: Best Reason Against Changing The 14th Amendment

Thu Aug 12, 2010 8:03 pm

There is no reason not to change it. Except to pander for future votes.
 
User avatar
Dreadnought
Posts: 9947
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 6:31 pm

RE: Best Reason Against Changing The 14th Amendment

Thu Aug 12, 2010 8:05 pm

Quoting D L X (Reply 10):
So, add that fact: Lorenzo is born after the 14A is amended to exclude children of people illegal in the country. Does that change your analysis?

If he was born after the amendment and was not granted US citizenship at birth (i.e. neither of his parents were citizens), then he is Mexican/Guatemalan or whatever. Where's the problem?
You have enemies? Good. That means you've stood up for something, sometime in your life. - W. Churchill
 
D L X
Topic Author
Posts: 11701
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

RE: Best Reason Against Changing The 14th Amendment

Thu Aug 12, 2010 8:10 pm

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 12):
If he was born after the amendment and was not granted US citizenship at birth (i.e. neither of his parents were citizens), then he is Mexican/Guatemalan or whatever. Where's the problem?

You're adding facts that I did not say were part of the story. He was born in the US, and for whatever reason, be it that his parents were legally present, or that they were illegals but got away with it, he was considered a citizen at birth. The salient fact is that his citizenship was not challenged until many years later. What do you do?
 
User avatar
Dreadnought
Posts: 9947
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 6:31 pm

RE: Best Reason Against Changing The 14th Amendment

Thu Aug 12, 2010 8:34 pm

Quoting D L X (Reply 13):
You're adding facts that I did not say were part of the story. He was born in the US, and for whatever reason, be it that his parents were legally present, or that they were illegals but got away with it, he was considered a citizen at birth. The salient fact is that his citizenship was not challenged until many years later. What do you do?

I see only two possibilities of how that can happen: 1) The newborn was granted citizenship papers without proof of the parents' citizenship being presented, in which case the government officer should be disciplined/fired/prosecuted, or 2) The parents presented false documentation, and they should be thrown in jail for a hell of a long time.

Look, you are raising silly objections as if this idea is somehow new and unusual. Virtually every civilized country in the world does this, and it works very well - relatively few cases of abuse, especially when you consider what is going on today. You have to show up in person at the registry office, show the required paperwork and you get your kids' papers. Otherwise you go to your nearest embassy. Easy. The granting of citizenship at birth was a post-slavery measure that has outlived its usefulness.
You have enemies? Good. That means you've stood up for something, sometime in your life. - W. Churchill
 
fr8mech
Posts: 6721
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 9:00 am

RE: Best Reason Against Changing The 14th Amendment

Thu Aug 12, 2010 8:45 pm

Quoting D L X (Reply 13):
You're adding facts that I did not say were part of the story. He was born in the US, and for whatever reason, be it that his parents were legally present, or that they were illegals but got away with it, he was considered a citizen at birth. The salient fact is that his citizenship was not challenged until many years later. What do you do?


But, you keep adding facts.

My assumptions would be (and using assumptions when the government bureaucrats is involved is an iffy proposition, at best) would be:
-any change to the 14th amendment would not be retroactive, thus, no challenges after the fact
-at least one parent must be a US citizen. Not a legal immigrant, not a 'green card' holder, not a visiting student...a citizen.
-once the child is born, it is incumbent on the parents to prove their citizenship. After at least one parent proves US citizenship, a valid birth certificate is issued.

So, to answer your question:

Quoting D L X (Reply 13):
The salient fact is that his citizenship was not challenged until many years later. What do you do?


I will answer with your own words:

Quoting D L X (Thread starter):
Hospital records and birth certificates are incredibly easy ways to prove citizenship


If the hospital issues a valid 'US Citizen" birth certificate, Lorenzo is a citizen.

I will add, that if the parents are on a path to citizenship, i.e. legal immigrants who have made their intentions known through application, once they become citizens, any children born in the US (between the parent's immigration and their naturalization) are automatically naturalized, so long as they have not obtained the age of 18.


I will also add, that I'm on the fence about this. I haven't decided if it's a good idea or not to change the 14th Amendment.

[Edited 2010-08-12 13:48:49]
When seconds count...the police are minutes away.
 
User avatar
DocLightning
Posts: 20154
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

RE: Best Reason Against Changing The 14th Amendment

Thu Aug 12, 2010 8:51 pm

Quoting D L X (Reply 8):

Also, I want to make sure you're on the same page as me - legal presence means you went through customs, and haven't overstayed a visa. You don't have to be a citizen to be legally present and have a baby.

I think that a tourist visa should not count as "legally present" for the purposes of a child having citizenship.

Quoting D L X (Reply 10):


So, add that fact: Lorenzo is born after the 14A is amended to exclude children of people illegal in the country. Does that change your analysis?

No, because in all such cases, the government should have to prove that he ISN'T a citizen and furthermore that he himself willingly provided fraudulent information to support his citizenship claim. In other words, the rules should be like those for crimes. You don't have to prove your innocence, the government has to prove your guilt.

So if the records are lacking, but he has a birth certificate and an SSN, then there is a presumption of citizenship.

Under the sorts of rules I'd propose, he never would have got the SSN if his parents weren't citizens or legally present aliens on a non-tourist visa or green card. And if it turns out someone screwed up 18 years before and wrongly issued him an SSN, then that's our fault and he's a citizen.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 14):

Look, you are raising silly objections as if this idea is somehow new and unusual. Virtually every civilized country in the world does this, and it works very well - relatively few cases of abuse, especially when you consider what is going on today. You have to show up in person at the registry office, show the required paperwork and you get your kids' papers. Otherwise you go to your nearest embassy. Easy. The granting of citizenship at birth was a post-slavery measure that has outlived its usefulness.

Dreaddy and I are agreeing again. I'm starting to get a cold, prickly sensation inside. It doesn't feel right. Mommy!
-Doc Lightning-

"The sky calls to us. If we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars."
-Carl Sagan
 
D L X
Topic Author
Posts: 11701
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

RE: Best Reason Against Changing The 14th Amendment

Thu Aug 12, 2010 9:10 pm

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 14):
Look, you are raising silly objections as if this idea is somehow new and unusual.

I'm sorry you find it silly, but it is in fact new and unusual to Americans. It may work in other countries, but other countries have the history and the legal infrastructure to support it. We don't. And so if we're going to have a legitimate non-emotion-driven debate about amending the 14A, we need to include in that discussion the externalities, such as a challenge to citizenship many years after the person is born.

With that, can I address your points?

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 14):
I see only two possibilities of how that can happen: 1) The newborn was granted citizenship papers without proof of the parents' citizenship being presented, in which case the government officer should be disciplined/fired/prosecuted, or 2) The parents presented false documentation, and they should be thrown in jail for a hell of a long time.

I think there are more possibilities than that, but I can for sake of argument assume there are not. If you don't know whether the kid fell into category 1 or 2 or some other category, how are you going to find out 18 years later?

I think Doc's answer is the only one that makes this work - incontestability. Once you get the card, it is irrevocable. (hope you don't lose it!)

But let's not kid ourselves that there are not American citizens that are deported because they don't have the right paperwork to prove their citizenship. (Think Puerto Ricans dropped off in Mexico.)

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 15):
But, you keep adding facts.

No, I don't believe that I did. I pointed out that the holes in the story were purposefully left as holes, as in they would be facts that would remain unknown when Lorenzo's citizenship was challenged many years after he was born. And I pointed out that I never meant applying the new amendment retroactively. (Though, there is no prohibition in the Constitution that would prevent such. In fact, the 14th Amendment originally was applied retroactively, granting citizenship to everyone who was born in the US before the 14A was ratified.)

In any event, I'm completely open to branching out the hypothetical to include new facts. Just as long as I get an answer with just my facts alone as well.  
Quoting fr8mech (Reply 15):
-any change to the 14th amendment would not be retroactive, thus, no challenges after the fact

Agreed. HT to Dreadnought for clarifying this.

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 15):
-at least one parent must be a US citizen. Not a legal immigrant, not a 'green card' holder, not a visiting student...a citizen.
-once the child is born, it is incumbent on the parents to prove their citizenship. After at least one parent proves US citizenship, a valid birth certificate is issued.

Well, those are new facts. Is that how the replacement amendment would look in your mind?

(Also, does this requirement that one US parent prove citizenship now require a paternity test?)

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 15):
If the hospital issues a valid 'US Citizen" birth certificate, Lorenzo is a citizen.

Not sure how I feel about the hospital determining the legal status of the parents.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 16):
I think that a tourist visa should not count as "legally present" for the purposes of a child having citizenship.

Okay, let's take that branch. How about a work visa, or a Green Card? Why and why not?

(And consider that if the kid is not a citizen, he may be a citizen of **nowhere** because he wasn't born in the other country.)

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 16):
No, because in all such cases, the government should have to prove that he ISN'T a citizen and furthermore that he himself willingly provided fraudulent information to support his citizenship claim. In other words, the rules should be like those for crimes. You don't have to prove your innocence, the government has to prove your guilt.

So if the records are lacking, but he has a birth certificate and an SSN, then there is a presumption of citizenship.

Acknowledged. Interesting.
 
fr8mech
Posts: 6721
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 9:00 am

RE: Best Reason Against Changing The 14th Amendment

Thu Aug 12, 2010 9:26 pm

Quoting D L X (Reply 17):
Well, those are new facts. Is that how the replacement amendment would look in your mind?

I'm no legal scholar or author, but I see no reason why those changes can't be incorporated.

Quoting D L X (Reply 17):
(Also, does this requirement that one US parent prove citizenship now require a paternity test?)

If the child's paternity is in question, then yes.

Quoting D L X (Reply 17):
(And consider that if the kid is not a citizen, he may be a citizen of **nowhere** because he wasn't born in the other country.)

Good question. I know that if you're born to Greek parents, regardless of location, you are Greek. What's the law like in other nations?

Quoting D L X (Reply 17):
Not sure how I feel about the hospital determining the legal status of the parents.

Hospitals deal with governmental processes and procedures all the time. This would just be another form. This wouldn't have to be an 'instant' thing. You fill out a form, you make your claims of citizenship and in 30 - 60 days, you get a spanking new US government approved 'US Citizen' birth certificate to replace the provisional one issued by the hospital. (Hey, I like this game of making up rules, regulations and laws).

Look, it's a complex question and needs a lot more than off-the-cuff debate. If the US were to go forward with this, it would have to happen under the amendment process. Lots of visibility and lots of scrutiny.

Bottom-line, we are one of the few nations that recognize a birthright to citizenship. Maybe that's a good thing, maybe night. I'm on the fence and haven't given it much thought beyond this discussion.

Let's see what the legal eagles come up with, if it gets that far.
When seconds count...the police are minutes away.
 
D L X
Topic Author
Posts: 11701
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

RE: Best Reason Against Changing The 14th Amendment

Thu Aug 12, 2010 9:33 pm

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 18):
I'm no legal scholar or author, but I see no reason why those changes can't be incorporated.

Sorry, I wasn't trying to be pointed there. Just asking the question.

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 18):
If the child's paternity is in question, then yes.

Then the new scam will be "pay me $500, and I'll tell the hospital that I'm tha daddy."

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 18):
Good question. I know that if you're born to Greek parents, regardless of location, you are Greek. What's the law like in other nations?

That's the way some countries do it, not just Greece. I think Ireland says anyone who is provably an 8th Irish can gain citizenship. But if my understanding is correct, Turkey requires you to be born in Turkey, which is why there are a bunch of ethnic Turks in Germany that are citizens of nowhere.

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 18):
Hey, I like this game of making up rules, regulations and laws

It is fun!!   And a lot better than yelling at each other about whether to follow this Red Guy's law or this Blue Guy's law.

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 18):
Look, it's a complex question and needs a lot more than off-the-cuff debate.

True, but still interesting (which equals fun to me) to discuss.

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 18):
If the US were to go forward with this, it would have to happen under the amendment process. Lots of visibility and lots of scrutiny.

True. I think that in and of itself is why this will never happen. There's a reason we haven't seen an amendment in 30+ years - it's just too freakin' hard to make one in the modern era, especially with the direct election of Senators.
 
fr8mech
Posts: 6721
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 9:00 am

RE: Best Reason Against Changing The 14th Amendment

Thu Aug 12, 2010 10:30 pm

Quoting D L X (Reply 19):
True. I think that in and of itself is why this will never happen. There's a reason we haven't seen an amendment in 30+ years - it's just too freakin' hard to make one in the modern era, especially with the direct election of Senators.

Oh so true. There was a reason the Framers of The Constitution wanted the state legislatures to choose the Senators. Now, The Senate is just a longer seated House.

Quoting D L X (Reply 19):
Then the new scam will be "pay me $500, and I'll tell the hospital that I'm tha daddy."

Of course that's the scam. How about we run a paternity test if the citizenship of the parents are in question? Such as if the parents refuse, or unable to, provide proof of citizenship.
When seconds count...the police are minutes away.
 
User avatar
LTU932
Posts: 13091
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2006 12:34 am

RE: Best Reason Against Changing The 14th Amendment

Fri Aug 13, 2010 12:24 am

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 18):
Good question. I know that if you're born to Greek parents, regardless of location, you are Greek. What's the law like in other nations?

Here's my perspective: My father is a naturlised German (he was born as an Italian), my mother is Costa Rican, so there are two sides of the story. When I was born, I acquired Costa Rican citizenship by birth, as I was born to a Costa Rican citizen (my mother). My father was already German, having gotten the German passport in 1980. But we did not know until around 1996 or so that I was also German by birth, so by then I got the papers that certified me as a German citizen.

Now, when I became 18, I'd usually have to choose which citizenship to keep, as German citizenship law doesn't allow dual citizenship unless you can't renounce the other citizenship you acquired by birth. Costa Rica changed its citizenship laws in the 90's because of the astronaut Franklin Chang, who had to acquire US citizenship in order to be accepted as an astronaut into NASA. Back then, Costa Rica did not allow any dual citizenship but because of the astronaut, the constitution was changed, making Costa Rican citizenship irrenounceable and allowing dual citizenship to natural born Costa Rican citizens, including allowing people who lost their citizenship to reacquire it. Some people call this the Franklin Chang Act.

Therefore, I got to keep both citizenships, because by the time I turned 18, Costa Rican citizenship was irrenounceable, therefore I became an exception in the eye of German citizenship law and was able to keep my German passport.
 
User avatar
DocLightning
Posts: 20154
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

RE: Best Reason Against Changing The 14th Amendment

Fri Aug 13, 2010 12:28 am

Quoting D L X (Reply 17):

Okay, let's take that branch. How about a work visa, or a Green Card? Why and why not?

Because a work visa or green card implies that you are immigrating. Immigration is good. We want to encourage immigration. We like immigrants. Most of us ARE immigrants. We just don't want illegal immigrants who are going to leach off the system and come here and have eight kids that they can't pay for. We want hard-working immigrants who are going to contribute to our culture and economy.

Even if they don't wind up staying, I'd rather give those kids the benefit of the doubt. At age 18 they will have to choose which passport they keep. So if they move back to their home countries, they will probably choose to surrender their US citizenship.

Coming here on vacation does not imply an intent to immigrate.
-Doc Lightning-

"The sky calls to us. If we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars."
-Carl Sagan
 
ltbewr
Posts: 12504
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2004 1:24 pm

RE: Best Reason Against Changing The 14th Amendment

Fri Aug 13, 2010 12:56 am

Quoting D L X (Reply 19):
Quoting fr8mech (Reply 18):
Good question. I know that if you're born to Greek parents, regardless of location, you are Greek. What's the law like in other nations?

That's the way some countries do it, not just Greece. I think Ireland says anyone who is provably an 8th Irish can gain citizenship. But if my understanding is correct, Turkey requires you to be born in Turkey, which is why there are a bunch of ethnic Turks in Germany that are citizens of nowhere.

This is one of the potential problems that has to be recognized before we make this huge change as to birthright citizenship in the USA. Making many 1000's of people statesless is probably against a number of human right treaties the USA is part of, cause many dragged out court cases and probably a lot of corruption.

What may have to happen is mandate a national standard of Birth Certificates, to have one form where one of the birth parents are citizens or legal residents thus the child is a citizen and a second from noting that both parents are not legal residents or citizens of the USA and that the child is not to be considered a citizen. Of course that leads to the hospitals having to enforce Federal immigration laws with all it's problems, this would especially be a conflict for hospitals operated by Catholic or other faith groups.
 
rfields5421
Posts: 5712
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 12:45 am

RE: Best Reason Against Changing The 14th Amendment

Fri Aug 13, 2010 3:04 am

Quoting D L X (Reply 17):
Quoting fr8mech (Reply 15):
If the hospital issues a valid 'US Citizen" birth certificate, Lorenzo is a citizen.

Not sure how I feel about the hospital determining the legal status of the parents.

Hospital issued birth certificates are not valid in the US to establish identity or citizenship.

Even older US citizens have problems if their only birth certificate is a hospital issued one today. Problems with establishing Social Security eligibility, obtaining a passport, even in some cases obtaining a renewed driver's license, etc. Quite often affidavits are required from US citizens who have known them for decades. My father has had to do this several times in the past 10-15 years.

Today hospitals collect information and it is submitted to the state which issues the birth certificate. Establishing proof of US citizenship for issuance of a 'US citizen' birth certificate would be just an extra form. Heck, I had to do the same basic thing when my now middle age children were born on a foreign country decades ago.

You are correct though - there would be issues and problems for some folks.

How the 14th Amerndment would be changed isn't the problem. The issue would be how the DOJ writes the implementing regulations. They could be written very tightly, or very loosely and could be modified as administrations change.

I do agree with one of the points mentioned above.

Any change to the 14th amendment is going to increase the requirements for a more verifiable ID - it will greatly increase the probability of a US National Identity Card becoming a reality.
 
fr8mech
Posts: 6721
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 9:00 am

RE: Best Reason Against Changing The 14th Amendment

Fri Aug 13, 2010 3:11 am

Quoting rfields5421 (Reply 26):
Hospital issued birth certificates are not valid in the US to establish identity or citizenship.

Not yet, but since we're making new laws....
When seconds count...the police are minutes away.
 
redflyer
Posts: 3882
Joined: Thu Feb 24, 2005 3:30 am

RE: Best Reason Against Changing The 14th Amendment

Fri Aug 13, 2010 3:29 am

Quoting D L X (Thread starter):
Situation ONE:
Quoting D L X (Thread starter):
Situation TWO:

The above two situations could happen even if Lorenzo was brought here at the age of 6 months by his illegal immigrant parents. He could grow up thinking he's a legal immigrant because, just as his parents were willing to be dishonest and violate the law of the land by coming across the border illegally, they could also be dishonest and lead Senor Lorenzo into believing he's a U.S. citizen. Come to think of it, given that they are probably on the lower rung of the socio-economic ladder with very little education (as many illegal immigrants are), they might be inclined to believe a rumor within the illegal immigrant community than any child under the age of 1 year who comes to the U.S. is given automatic citizenship. So they raise their brain-powerhouse son believing he's a U.S. citizen, and Lorenzo grows up thinking he's a U.S. citizen. He goes to apply for his student loan and - aw $h1t!

So what are we supposed to do? Weep rivers of tears because he doesn't get to go to college?

Quoting D L X (Thread starter):
Situation THREE:

Your situation THREE is the very reason why voter registration laws should be a little tighter. So it doesn't prove anything other than the fact that to register as a voter is very easy, which only cuts off an avenue of validation when tight elections occur.
My other home is in the sky inside my Piper Cherokee 180.
 
Pyrex
Posts: 4088
Joined: Thu Aug 25, 2005 7:24 am

RE: Best Reason Against Changing The 14th Amendment

Fri Aug 13, 2010 4:44 am

Quoting D L X (Reply 4):
Indeed, the way most Americans prove they are citizens is by showing a birth certificate

How exactly is a birth certificate a proof of citizenship? As far as I can tell, they do not have pictures, fingerprints, ADN records or any other thing that would allow you to positively identify someone. What is stopping me from showing up at the polling station holding up a piece of paper saying my name was Kareem Abdul Jabar and getting to vote? Serious question here - how can you prevent identity fraud like that in the US?

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 9):
Which is why I am 100% in support of national ID cards. Those who resist the idea are just paranoid.

  
Read this very carefully, I shall write this only once!
 
User avatar
DocLightning
Posts: 20154
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

RE: Best Reason Against Changing The 14th Amendment

Fri Aug 13, 2010 4:47 am

Quoting redflyer (Reply 26):
The above two situations could happen even if Lorenzo was brought here at the age of 6 months by his illegal immigrant parents. He could grow up thinking he's a legal immigrant because, just as his parents were willing to be dishonest and violate the law of the land by coming across the border illegally, they could also be dishonest and lead Senor Lorenzo into believing he's a U.S. citizen. Come to think of it, given that they are probably on the lower rung of the socio-economic ladder with very little education (as many illegal immigrants are), they might be inclined to believe a rumor within the illegal immigrant community than any child under the age of 1 year who comes to the U.S. is given automatic citizenship. So they raise their brain-powerhouse son believing he's a U.S. citizen, and Lorenzo grows up thinking he's a U.S. citizen. He goes to apply for his student loan and - aw $h1t!

There would be ample opportunity to figure this out before he turns 18. Like when his parents take him to go get his shots and they have no insurance and can't get him any insurance without an SSN. Or when they can't enroll him in school. Or when they can't get him WIC and food stamps.

They're going to figure out really quick that that Coyote lied to them. And that they can't live here on $40/day that dad is picking up in odd jobs. And they're going to go back and tell all their friends.
-Doc Lightning-

"The sky calls to us. If we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars."
-Carl Sagan
 
fr8mech
Posts: 6721
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 9:00 am

RE: Best Reason Against Changing The 14th Amendment

Fri Aug 13, 2010 5:11 am

Quoting Pyrex (Reply 27):
How exactly is a birth certificate a proof of citizenship?

Typically, if an organization is asking for your birth certificate they will also ask for corraborrating identification, i.e. somthing with your picture and the same name information as on the birth certificate.

A birth certificate alone does not cut it.

Example: I recently applied for a passport for my 4 year old. We needed to produce his birth certificate, my identification (passport), and my wife's identification (passport). Our names had to match the names on the birth certificate.
When seconds count...the police are minutes away.
 
ATCtower
Posts: 472
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2007 1:46 am

RE: Best Reason Against Changing The 14th Amendment

Fri Aug 13, 2010 5:18 am

Flame me if you want, but...

The majority of Americans do not have an issue with someone "illegal" with good intentions, and willing to pay taxes to the support the country improving their way of life here. The objection arises from separating those from the ones coming to the country as a land of prosperity to exploit it. I could not in good conscience believe Hong Kong was a good place for my child to receive all benefits, send my pregnant wife over to give birth, and expect indefinite and unequivocal citizenship and rights granted by taxpayers of that nation to support them while my wife did nothing. Unfortunately this is the way of so many (and again, against "PC belief") people South of the United States feel. Herein lies the objection you will find from so many good hard working Americans.

We all know the US took much of our land from Mexico and can not change the actions of our ancestors (thus, thank God we are not paying slave reparations), but can only act upon the present and future laid upon us.

I for one disagree with the "gang-bangin' homies" getting free medical care, or the benefits afforded honest Americans. Even so, at some point in their lives, they will perform one of two services beneficial to the honest people in this country. Either, they will die and make news (which as callous as it sounds, we all like [and don't you liberal wussies lie and claim you don't]), or will find the err of their ways, go straight, and pay taxes. The same holds true for any 'wanna-be' American trying to plant their anchor seed to gain asylum.

My $.02
By reading the above post you waive all rights to be offended. If you do not like what you read, forget it.
 
dxing
Posts: 5859
Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2008 5:14 pm

RE: Best Reason Against Changing The 14th Amendment

Fri Aug 13, 2010 8:16 am

I don't know why this is so difficult. At birth either the parents can produce documentation that they are in fact citizens or they can't. If they can't the birth cert is annotated to show that said individual is not a U.S. citizen.

Pregnancy is not like the old Bill Cosby routine where he described it as being a lot easier if it were like a polaroid camera, poof and a minute later you have a baby. It still takes 9 months in the womb. Plenty of time to get your papers in order.

This loophole needs to be rectified as one part of closing the illegal immigration nightmare.


BTW DLX, my parents have been dead now for 5 and 7 years respectively now and I still have their birth certs in my lock box at home. That damn personal repsonsibility thing just keeps rearing its ugly head.
Warm winds blowing, heating blue skies, a road that goes forever, I'm going to Texas!
 
windy95
Posts: 2660
Joined: Thu Dec 18, 2008 1:11 pm

RE: Best Reason Against Changing The 14th Amendment

Fri Aug 13, 2010 12:19 pm

Quoting dxing (Reply 32):
This loophole needs to be rectified as one part of closing the illegal immigration nightmare

But according to the author of the 14th Amendment there is no loophole. The loope hole has been created by activist judges.

Quote:
The 14th Amendment enters the picture after the Civil War. It contains this language: “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.”

Note the key part: “subject to the jurisdiction thereof

The author of the 14th Amendment Citizenship Clause, Senator Jacob M. Howard, stated, in reference to the Amendment, “This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the family of ambassadors, or foreign ministers accredited to the Government of the United States, but will include every other class of persons.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birthri...t_citizenship_in_the_United_States
 
L410Turbolet
Posts: 5455
Joined: Wed May 05, 2004 9:12 am

RE: Best Reason Against Changing The 14th Amendment

Fri Aug 13, 2010 12:33 pm

Quoting D L X (Reply 4):
We don't got no national ID

Wouldn't IDs and ditching the ius soli solve a lot of your headaches with illegal immigration? Opposition against "Big Brother" ID cards sure had some merit 50 years ago, but today the "Big Brother" has so many forms and ways to gather info about people he couldn't care less about IDs.
Simple cost/benefit assessment. Make one card for both ID and a driver's license and it's a win/win situaton
 
windy95
Posts: 2660
Joined: Thu Dec 18, 2008 1:11 pm

RE: Best Reason Against Changing The 14th Amendment

Fri Aug 13, 2010 12:45 pm

Quoting L410Turbolet (Reply 35):
Opposition against "Big Brother" ID cards sure had some merit 50 years ago, but today the "Big Brother" has so many forms and ways to gather info about people he couldn't care less about IDs.
Simple cost/benefit assessment. Make one card for both ID and a driver's license and it's a win/win situaton

Exactly. Combo drivers/minipassport type id. As if the Feds do not know everything about me already..
 
D L X
Topic Author
Posts: 11701
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

RE: Best Reason Against Changing The 14th Amendment

Fri Aug 13, 2010 12:47 pm

Quoting windy95 (Reply 34):
The loope hole has been created by activist judges.

It is not judicial activism to interpret the clause by the words they use.

Quoting windy95 (Reply 34):
The author of the 14th Amendment Citizenship Clause, Senator Jacob M. Howard, stated, in reference to the Amendment, “This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the family of ambassadors, or foreign ministers accredited to the Government of the United States, but will include every other class of persons.

He may have thought that, but those weren't the words that ended up in the Amendment. The amendment is clear: if you're born in the US, you're a citizen. And if you looked at the entire record, you'd find that many senators said exactly that.

This is why legislative history is useless in determining what an amendment means - when something is written by committee with people adding and deleting little phrases here and there, you cannot give weight to the intent of any individual addition or subtraction. The amendment means what it says.
 
PanHAM
Posts: 8649
Joined: Fri May 06, 2005 6:44 pm

RE: Best Reason Against Changing The 14th Amendment

Fri Aug 13, 2010 12:57 pm

Quoting D L X (Reply 19):
urkey requires you to be born in Turkey, which is why there are a bunch of ethnic Turks in Germany that are citizens of nowhere.

No, they are Turkish citizens, Turkey really wants them and i refrain from saying why. but they coiuld apply for german citizenshiup as well.

Quoting LTU932 (Reply 21):
But we did not know until around 1996 or so that I was also German by birth, so by then I got the papers that certified me as a German citizen.

No problema, The worst case would be you have Italian citizenship as well which gives you equal status as an EU citizen in Germany.

I have been quíck reading this and may have overlooked if someone wrote this already. I give you an example what can happen in the USA to US citizens:

Father, US soldier and citizen by birth, stationed with US forces in Germany.
Mother: German., may bbe even later naturalized US citizen

They have children, who have German citizenship from the mother and US from the father. They eventually return to the USA and the kid enters on a 90 day visitor permit. They forget to do the paperwork.

the kid goes through school, college, eventually even university and marries, has a family and for some reason, may be applying for a passport or whatever, the INS says - no, you are not a citizen, arrests him and deports him to Frankfurt on the next flight out.

He has German citizenship, which he can prove as he's on the registry here and qualifies for welfare. The guy does not speak a word German, is thrown out of his life and has to start a new one in his mid twenties or thirties. We have dozens of cases like that living in Frankfurt and they can be lucky that they fall back on the German social system and get the help needed.

Ok, the parents made a mistake along the road, but what country is that when such mistakes can't be healed when it bis known that the father was a born US citizen? I call that cruel and merciless.
powered by Eierlikör
 
windy95
Posts: 2660
Joined: Thu Dec 18, 2008 1:11 pm

RE: Best Reason Against Changing The 14th Amendment

Fri Aug 13, 2010 1:40 pm

Quoting D L X (Reply 37):
It is not judicial activism to interpret the clause by the words they use.

Yes it is....

When the author is on record as saying....

Quoting D L X (Reply 37):
Quoting windy95 (Reply 34):
The author of the 14th Amendment Citizenship Clause, Senator Jacob M. Howard, stated, in reference to the Amendment, “This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the family of ambassadors, or foreign ministers accredited to the Government of the United States, but will include every other class of persons

Funny how seperation of church and state gets pulled from one old letter of Jeffersons and is used as the law of the land. But here you have the actual authors own words on the subject and it is dismissed...LOL
 
Flighty
Posts: 7882
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2007 3:07 am

RE: Best Reason Against Changing The 14th Amendment

Fri Aug 13, 2010 2:05 pm

Quoting D L X (Thread starter):
How is Lorenzo going to prove his parents were legally in the country when he was born? Any evidence of such, if it ever existed, is LOOOONG gone.

Well, how do other countries do it? If baby is born to foreign guests, my guess is their embassy either arranges a visa for that baby when it is born, or deportation proceedings are begun at once, and the parents and baby are deported within a month or two. Again, that's only my guess how Mexico would do it to a Brazilian, or how Japan would do it to a Chinese.
 
rfields5421
Posts: 5712
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 12:45 am

RE: Best Reason Against Changing The 14th Amendment

Fri Aug 13, 2010 9:59 pm

Quoting windy95 (Reply 32):
But according to the author of the 14th Amendment there is no loophole. The loope hole has been created by activist judges.

Quote:
The 14th Amendment enters the picture after the Civil War. It contains this language: “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.”

Note the key part: “subject to the jurisdiction thereof

The author of the 14th Amendment Citizenship Clause, Senator Jacob M. Howard, stated, in reference to the Amendment, “This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the family of ambassadors, or foreign ministers accredited to the Government of the United States, but will include every other class of persons.

Okay - he defines foreigners, aliens as the family of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the Government of the United States

and defines citizenship will include every other class of person

How is that different from the way the amendment is applied today.

His statement very clearly does not create a definition of foreigners or aliens as people in this nation as immigrants trying to work, visiting or such.

The way you implied the amendment author's quote means the children born of the great numbers of Irish, Italian, German, Polish and other Europeans who came to this country in the latter half of the 1800s and early 1900s would not have been given citizenship unless their parents became naturalized citizens.

Most of the first generation immigrants did not become citizens, allow the births of their children to grant them citizenship. So according to your description if your family was not in the US at the time of the Civil War - then you should not be considered a US citizen.
 
User avatar
LTU932
Posts: 13091
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2006 12:34 am

RE: Best Reason Against Changing The 14th Amendment

Fri Aug 13, 2010 11:42 pm

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 36):
No problema, The worst case would be you have Italian citizenship as well which gives you equal status as an EU citizen in Germany.

I don't think it would have been that simple. My father had to renounce the Italian citizenship when he got the German passport for the first time. And my mother, who's a descendant of Italian immigrants to Costa Rica (specifically through her paternal grandparents), is trying to get the Italian citizenship along with her Costa Rican citizenship (in a similar way as how e.g. Italian-Argentinians do it, by proving that they descent from natural born Italians), but the process got stuck in the middle of the road.
 
PanHAM
Posts: 8649
Joined: Fri May 06, 2005 6:44 pm

RE: Best Reason Against Changing The 14th Amendment

Sat Aug 14, 2010 6:36 am

Quoting LTU932 (Reply 40):

I don't think it would have been that simple. My father had to renounce the Italian citizenship when he got the German

Yes, Germany does not allow dual citizenship and poissibly Italy is the same. What I meant actually was, in the EU it is not that important which EU citizenship you have, you have the same rights as a German in Italy or an Italian in Germany or both living in France as the locals have. You can vote in local elections, the only exception is national elections.

Essentially, if you have citizenship of one EU country you can settle in all other 26, work and do whatever you want.


.
powered by Eierlikör
 
Longhornmaniac
Posts: 2972
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2005 2:33 pm

RE: Best Reason Against Changing The 14th Amendment

Sat Aug 14, 2010 6:53 am

Quoting D L X (Thread starter):
screw Dallas

I stopped reading when you said this.   

Everything else I agree with, though.

Cheers,
Cameron
Cheers,
Cameron
 
User avatar
Aesma
Posts: 7962
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 6:14 am

RE: Best Reason Against Changing The 14th Amendment

Sun Aug 15, 2010 12:03 am

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 41):
poissibly Italy is the same

I have a cousin that is both French and Italian (and voted for Berlusconi AND Sarkozy, argh !).
New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Pihero, ThePointblank and 33 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos