I don't know if you've noticed, but a lot of people are becoming citizens without "respecting our immigration laws" or "following the rules." These people are called babies. And Sen. Rand Paul (R - Ky.) is doing something about them.
Yes! Rand Paul, who is, according to some historians, the greatest Senator who ever kidnapped a girl in college, has teamed up with La. Sen. David Vitter, the Senate's No. 1 guy who likes to dress up in a diaper in the presence of hookers, to introduce "a resolution that would amend the constitution." (Update: He is introducing "a resolution that would amend the constitution," not an actual constitutional amendment. Just so we're clear.)
Why? Well, the Fourteenth Amendment confers citizenship on any babies born in the United States, even if their parents aren't citizens. And that means those babies aren't "respecting our immigration laws." So, of course it follows that we need to pass a "resolution to amend the constitution"—again, not an amendment—to make sure those babies "follow the rules." Not just, you know, "share" and "be nice." The immigration rules! The first rule: Don't be a baby whose parents aren't citizens.
Anyway! You non-babies might be thinking something along the lines of, "Hey, hold up, isn't birthright citizenship expressly guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment and a century and a half of judicial precedent?" And maybe you are also thinking, "Whoa there, isn't it the job of the judiciary, and not Congress, to decide what rights the constitution does and does not confer, and isn't that, in fact, an incredibly important component of the checks-and-balances system embodied by the very constitution Vitter and Paul are messing around with?" And! Also! "What does this even mean, 'a resolution to amend the constitution,' I mean, really, isn't Rand Paul's whole thing that he loves the constitution, I mean, shouldn't he be aware that this is not actually how this stuff works, at all?"
But you're probably just saying stuff like that because you love babies and want to give them a free pass. Well, you're wrong. And stupid
Yes! Rand Paul, who is, according to some historians, the greatest Senator who ever kidnapped a girl in college, has teamed up with La. Sen. David Vitter, the Senate's No. 1 guy who likes to dress up in a diaper in the presence of hookers, to introduce "a resolution that would amend the constitution." (Update: He is introducing "a resolution that would amend the constitution," not an actual constitutional amendment. Just so we're clear.)
Why? Well, the Fourteenth Amendment confers citizenship on any babies born in the United States, even if their parents aren't citizens. And that means those babies aren't "respecting our immigration laws." So, of course it follows that we need to pass a "resolution to amend the constitution"—again, not an amendment—to make sure those babies "follow the rules." Not just, you know, "share" and "be nice." The immigration rules! The first rule: Don't be a baby whose parents aren't citizens.
"Citizenship is a privilege, and only those who respect our immigration laws should be allowed to enjoy its benefits," said Sen. Paul. "This legislation makes it necessary that everyone follow the rules, and goes through same process to become a U.S. citizen."Do you hear that, babies? I see you, disrespecting our immigration laws. You make me sick. Everyone has to go through the same process! Everyone has to follow the rules! Even you, stupid babies!
Vitter and Paul do not believe that the 14th Amendment confers birthright citizenship to the children of illegal aliens, either by its language or intent. This resolution makes clear that under the 14th Amendment a person born in the United States to illegal aliens does not automatically gain citizenship.
Anyway! You non-babies might be thinking something along the lines of, "Hey, hold up, isn't birthright citizenship expressly guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment and a century and a half of judicial precedent?" And maybe you are also thinking, "Whoa there, isn't it the job of the judiciary, and not Congress, to decide what rights the constitution does and does not confer, and isn't that, in fact, an incredibly important component of the checks-and-balances system embodied by the very constitution Vitter and Paul are messing around with?" And! Also! "What does this even mean, 'a resolution to amend the constitution,' I mean, really, isn't Rand Paul's whole thing that he loves the constitution, I mean, shouldn't he be aware that this is not actually how this stuff works, at all?"
But you're probably just saying stuff like that because you love babies and want to give them a free pass. Well, you're wrong. And stupid
No comments:
Post a Comment