MALDEF's "Truth in Immigration" misleads about 14th Amendment quote (Lamar Smith)

The Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF) has at least an indirect link to the Mexican government, and they run a website called "Truth in Immigration" (TII) which, as we'll see, is a misnomer. Their "Fear-mongering in Congress" (truthinimmigration.org/CompleteStory.aspx?sid=55) discusses an attempt by Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX) to abolish some aspects of birthright citizenship involving the way that the 14th Amendment has been interpreted for around a century.

First, TII says that he "advocates for the elimination of birthright citizenship", which is probably not true: presumably he only wants to prevent the children of illegal aliens or foreign visitors from being automatically declared citizens. Unfortunately, a May 25, 2008 guest editorial from him (link) could be read as him wanting to eliminate birthright citizenship entirely. However, 1997's H.R.7 was discussed at a hearing (link) where Smith supported it:

Mr. Bilbray's bill would extend birthright citizenship only to a child born in wedlock to parents either of whom is a citizen, national or permanent resident and to a child born out of wedlock if the child's mother is a citizen, national, or permanent resident.

And, 2007's H.R.1940 was co-sponsored by Smith and 99 others and had similiar provisions (link).

So, while Smith isn't helping his cause by failing to specify what he wants, MALDEF didn't give him the benefit of the doubt and isn't being intellectually honest .

And, it gets worse, as we examine this quote from their page:

Representative Smith asserts that our Founding Fathers "never sought to guarantee citizenship to children of illegal immigrants."5 To support his assertion, Representative Smith quotes Senator Jacob Howard (R-MI), who proposed the language on citizenship, when in 1866 he stated that the citizenship "will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners."6 Had Representative Smith finished the quote, it would have read "foreigners... who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the Government of the United States, but will include every other class of person."7 In relying on this legislative history, the Supreme Court found that "the protection of the Fourteenth Amendment extends to anyone, citizen or stranger, who is subject to the laws of a State, and reaches to every corner of a State's territory."8

Intrigued by their use of ellipses after "foreigners" (bolding added above), I went looking for the full quote (middle column, halfway down) [1]. They left off just one word:

"will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors, or foreign ministers accredited to the Government of the United States, but will include every other class of person."

Yes, that's right: the only word they omitted was "aliens".

[1] Congressional Globe, Senate, 39th Congress, 1st Session, Page 2890

Comments

"Beaners" That word is much more appropriate.

Florida state legislator Sen. Frederica Wilson, D-Miami, whose district is filled with thousands of Caribbean immigrants wants to legally ban the term "illegal alien" from the state's official documents, reports the Miami Herald. "I personally find the word 'alien' offensive when applied to individuals, especially to children," said Wilson. "An alien to me is someone from out of space." They don't even understand the meaning of the word.

So they are criticizing someone for not finishing a quotation and to prove it pull out...an intentionally misleading, incomplete quotation. Classic.

Yep, they're bastards, those MALDEF people. And it can definitely be pretty funny when 'people of color' are a majority in a district -- they often elect real clowns.

eh the system of race clowns can someday eat us all alive, but it is funny to watch black/brown and yellow people who had nothing in that person so called Nation come here and make out real well and call whites evil pigs.

Including "permanent residents" in eligibility for birthright citizenship obliterates our sovereignty, or has everybody forgotten that our government has recently signed several treaties that essentially gives unlimited residency rights to tens or billions of foreigners? The "permanent resident" right granted to children of foreigners was a judicial fiat NOT SANCTIONED BY THE CONSTITUTION. With our treaty obligations we should limit unregulated US citizenship birthrights only to citizens, anything less would be an abandonment of our sovereignty & right to self determination.

I like how all of you lowlife pieces of shit pretend that what you are after is against "illegal immigration" when in reality you clearly show your racism in your posts.