Monday, December 12, 2011

Good News On Maryland's DREAM Act Front!

You might recall that earlier this year, Governor Martin O'Malley signed into law the DREAM Act, which among other things, puts the children of illegal immigrants (by the way - that makes the kids illegal immigrants too) on the same status as children of Maryland citizens when it comes to college admission.  I've posted quite a bit on it; here's a list of my posts.  You'll recall that a number of good, concerned Maryland citizens petitioned the measure to the ballot. 

Sadly, but none to surprisingly, the progressive-influenced Maryland Catholic Conference not only failed to support our efforts, but they outright trash-talked us for exercising our rights as citizens.  Moreover, CASA and some other cabals tried to stop the petition on various specious grounds.  Well, comes now the news that their arguments were so flimsy that they were starting to collapse on themselves  From Help Save Maryland we read that CASA has withdrawn a significant portion of their complaints.  Thus it looks like next November, each Maryland voter will have the opportunity to make his/her voice heard on this important matter.

6 comments:

  1. "...the children of illegal immigrants (by the way - that makes the kids illegal immigrants too)..."

    Fail. Janet, please read the 14th Amendment. If a child is born in this country, whether their parents are here legally or not, that child is a US citizen. While there are scenarios in which the children of illegal immigrants CAN be an illegal immigrant themselves, they are all rendered moot if said child was born in the US.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Thomas, one must read the entire 14th. There is that phrase "subject to the jurisdiction thereof". If illegal aliens have a child in this country, their country of origin usually has a claim of allegiance on that child, which would impair that child's allegiance to the U.S. Citizenship in that case is not automatic.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Nice try. But, wrong.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Wong_Kim_Ark

    ReplyDelete
  4. Again, a thorough read is in order. From that same wikipedia article, "Since Wong's parents were legal residents of the United States at the time of his birth, some legal scholars have argued in recent years that the Wong Kim Ark precedent does not apply when alien parents are in the country illegally, and that U.S.-born children of illegal immigrants do not have a constitutional entitlement to automatic citizenship at birth."

    ReplyDelete
  5. "Some legal scholars" are not the Supreme Court. "...the Supreme Court majority decided that this phrase referred to being subject to U.S. law—and thus chose to interpret the language of the amendment in a way (consistent with English common law) that granted U.S. citizenship to almost all children born on American soil..."

    ReplyDelete
  6. The circumstances of that particular case (i.e., the parents being legal residents) are not irrelevant. There's also the matter of that word "almost". Why not all? The issue is not moot, but very much alive.

    ReplyDelete

Please be respectful and courteous to others on this blog. We reserve the right to delete comments that violate courtesy and/or those that promote dissent from the Magisterium of the Roman Catholic Church.