Immigration Voice - Forums
Register Get Involved Contact Lawmakers Advocacy Discussion Image Image Image Image

Go Back   Immigration Voice > Immigration Voice Issues and Congressional updates > News articles and reports
Click to log in with Facebook
News articles and reports News articles, op-eds, reports on issues of immigration.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 01-16-2009, 01:18 PM
Donor
Priority Date
:
Feb-07
Category
:
EB2
I140 Mailed Date
:
03/21/2007
Chargeability
:
India
Processing Stage
:
I-485
I485 Mailed Date
:
07/19/2007
Compare
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 362
saketkapur has a reputation beyond repute saketkapur has a reputation beyond repute saketkapur has a reputation beyond repute saketkapur has a reputation beyond repute saketkapur has a reputation beyond repute saketkapur has a reputation beyond repute saketkapur has a reputation beyond repute saketkapur has a reputation beyond repute saketkapur has a reputation beyond repute saketkapur has a reputation beyond repute saketkapur has a reputation beyond repute
Default Summary of Immigration Legislation Introduced in the 111th Congress, through January

Following have been compiled by Ron Gotcher:
http://imminfo.com/resources/summary...ation_leg.html


Summary of Immigration Legislation Introduced in the 111th Congress, through January 13th
1. H.CON.RES.19 : Expressing the sense of the Congress that State and local governments should be supported for taking actions to discourage illegal immigration and that legislation should be enacted to ease the burden on State and local governments for taking such actions.
Sponsor: Rep Poe, Ted [TX-2] (introduced 1/9/2009)


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. H.R.19 : To require employers to conduct employment eligibility verification.
Sponsor: Rep Calvert, Ken [CA-44] (introduced 1/6/2009)


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. H.R.42 : To establish a fact-finding Commission to extend the study of a prior Commission to investigate and determine facts and circumstances surrounding the relocation, internment, and deportation to Axis countries of Latin Americans of Japanese descent from December 1941 through February 1948, and the impact of those actions by the United States, and to recommend appropriate remedies, and for other purposes.
Sponsor: Rep Becerra, Xavier [CA-31] (introduced 1/6/2009)


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

4. H.R.73 : To provide for the collection of data on traffic stops.
Sponsor: Rep Jackson-Lee, Sheila [TX-18] (introduced 1/6/2009).


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

5. H.R.98 : To amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to enforce restrictions on employment in the United States of unauthorized aliens through the use of improved Social Security cards and an Employment Eligibility Database, and for other purposes.
Sponsor: Rep Dreier, David [CA-26] (introduced 1/6/2009)


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

6. H.R.126 : To amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to limit citizenship at birth, merely by virtue of birth in the United States, to persons with citizen or legal resident mothers.
Sponsor: Rep Gallegly, Elton [CA-24] (introduced 1/6/2009)


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

7. H.R.127 : To amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to change certain requirements relating to a sponsor's affidavit of support for an alien.
Sponsor: Rep Gallegly, Elton [CA-24] (introduced 1/6/2009)


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

8. H.R.128 : To amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to strengthen the criminal consequences for certain violations, and for other purposes.
Sponsor: Rep Gallegly, Elton [CA-24] (introduced 1/6/2009)


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

9. H.R.142 : To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to require the Secretary of the Treasury to notify the Secretary of Homeland Security of employer returns showing the employment of individuals not authorized to be employed in the United States, to notify the employers that they must terminate the employment of those employees, to provide an opportunity for those employees to contest the information, and to establish a procedure for determining whether individuals who are not authorized to be employed in the United States are so employed.
Sponsor: Rep Gallegly, Elton [CA-24] (introduced 1/6/2009)


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

10. H.R.144 : To designate Haiti under section 244 of the Immigration and Nationality Act in order to render nationals of Haiti eligible for temporary protected status under such section.
Sponsor: Rep Hastings, Alcee L. [FL-23] (introduced 1/6/2009)


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

11. H.R.182 : To provide discretionary authority to an immigration judge to determine that an alien parent of a United States citizen child should not be ordered removed, deported, or excluded from the United States.
Sponsor: Rep Serrano, Jose E. [NY-16] (introduced 1/6/2009)


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

12. H.R.246 : To amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to exempt elementary and secondary schools from the fee imposed on employers filing petitions with respect to non-immigration workers under the H-1B program.
Sponsor: Rep Green, Gene [TX-29] (introduced 1/7/2009)


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

13. H.R.264 : To amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to comprehensively reform immigration law, and for other purposes.
Sponsor: Rep Jackson-Lee, Sheila [TX-18] (introduced 1/7/2009)


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

14. H.R.314 : To increase the number of Federal judgeships in certain judicial districts with heavy caseloads of criminal immigration cases.
Sponsor: Rep Cuellar, Henry [TX-28] (introduced 1/8/2009)


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

15. H.R.373 : To amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to render inadmissible and deportable certain aliens convicted of drunk driving, and for other purposes.
Sponsor: Rep Flake, Jeff [AZ-6] (introduced 1/9/2009)


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

16. S.9 : A bill to strengthen the United States economy, provide for more effective border and employment enforcement, and for other purposes.
Sponsor: Sen Reid, Harry [NV] (introduced 1/6/2009)


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

17. S.84 : A bill to close the loophole that allowed the 9/11 hijackers to obtain credit cards from United States banks that financed their terrorist activities, to ensure that illegal immigrants cannot obtain credit cards to evade United States immigration laws, and for other purposes.
Sponsor: Sen Vitter, David [LA] (introduced 1/6/2009)


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

18. S.95 : A bill to prohibit appropriated funds from being used in contravention of section 642(a) of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

19. S.168 : A bill to amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to provide for compensation to States incarcerating undocumented aliens charged with a felony or 2 or more misdemeanors.
Sponsor: Sen Feinstein, Dianne [CA] (introduced 1/8/2009)


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

20. S.203 : A bill to amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to modify the requirements for participation in the visa waiver program and for other purposes.
Sponsor: Sen Feinstein, Dianne [CA] (introduced 1/12/2009)
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


  #2 (permalink)  
Old 01-16-2009, 01:57 PM
Senior Member
Priority Date
:
May-06
Category
:
EB2
I140 Mailed Date
:
08/02/2006
Chargeability
:
India
Processing Stage
:
I-485
I485 Mailed Date
:
07/27/2007
Compare
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 417
a_yaja has a brilliant future a_yaja has a brilliant future a_yaja has a brilliant future a_yaja has a brilliant future a_yaja has a brilliant future a_yaja has a brilliant future a_yaja has a brilliant future a_yaja has a brilliant future a_yaja has a brilliant future a_yaja has a brilliant future a_yaja has a brilliant future
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by saketkapur View Post
6. H.R.126 : To amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to limit citizenship at birth, merely by virtue of birth in the United States, to persons with citizen or legal resident mothers.
Sponsor: Rep Gallegly, Elton [CA-24] (introduced 1/6/2009)
This will not fly - citizenship by birth is in the constitution. Unless the constitution is amended, this law has no meaning.
__________________
Greened on 05/04/2011
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


  #3 (permalink)  
Old 01-16-2009, 02:10 PM
Senior Member
Priority Date
:
N/A
Category
:
N/A
I140 Mailed Date
:
Chargeability
:
Nigeria
Processing Stage
:
N/A
I485 Mailed Date
:
Compare
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 254
Alabaman has much to be proud of Alabaman has much to be proud of Alabaman has much to be proud of Alabaman has much to be proud of Alabaman has much to be proud of Alabaman has much to be proud of Alabaman has much to be proud of Alabaman has much to be proud of Alabaman has much to be proud of
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by a_yaja View Post
This will not fly - citizenship by birth is in the constitution. Unless the constitution is amended, this law has no meaning.
besides that it is stupid... its like punishing the unborn for the sins of their parents
__________________
Arrived F1: Dec. 2001
H1-B: May 2005
Labor Applied: No
I-140 Applied: No
I-485 Applied: No
Laid off: April 2009
Departed USA: May 2009
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


  #4 (permalink)  
Old 01-16-2009, 02:17 PM
Senior Member
Priority Date
:
Jul-07
Category
:
EB3
I140 Mailed Date
:
Chargeability
:
India
Processing Stage
:
I-140
I485 Mailed Date
:
Compare
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 143
Circus123 is just really nice Circus123 is just really nice Circus123 is just really nice Circus123 is just really nice
Smile Sin ... Not really....

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alabaman View Post
besides that it is stupid... its like punishing the unborn for the sins of their parents
The parents happen to be from a different part of the world .... Yes that should not be a disadvantage who gets born in this free country ...

Just my thought!
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


  #5 (permalink)  
Old 01-16-2009, 02:25 PM
Senior Member
Priority Date
:
N/A
Category
:
EB2
I140 Mailed Date
:
Chargeability
:
India
Processing Stage
:
I-140
I485 Mailed Date
:
Compare
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 952
h1techSlave has a reputation beyond repute h1techSlave has a reputation beyond repute h1techSlave has a reputation beyond repute h1techSlave has a reputation beyond repute h1techSlave has a reputation beyond repute h1techSlave has a reputation beyond repute h1techSlave has a reputation beyond repute h1techSlave has a reputation beyond repute h1techSlave has a reputation beyond repute h1techSlave has a reputation beyond repute h1techSlave has a reputation beyond repute
Default The intent of this amendment

Quote:
Originally Posted by a_yaja View Post
This will not fly - citizenship by birth is in the constitution. Unless the constitution is amended, this law has no meaning.
I am not trying to say whether this amendment is right or wrong. But the intent of this amendment is to prevent pregnant mothers from crossing the border just for the purpose of ensuring citizenship to the baby. I have also heard many pregnant mothers from Middle Eastern countries come to America just so that their babies are US citizens. They give birth here and go back. The original law was put in the constitution so that former slaves and their new born babies could become citizens rather than being sent back to Africa.

Further, New Zealand recently updated their constitution to stop automatic citizenship by birth clause. In UK, you will not get automatic citizenship unless born to British citizens or permanent residents.

This is the situation in India: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_nationality_law

Both approaches have merits and draw backs.
__________________
Support Fairness! DONATE

Last edited by h1techSlave; 01-16-2009 at 07:18 PM.
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


  #6 (permalink)  
Old 01-16-2009, 04:15 PM
Senior Member
Priority Date
:
N/A
Category
:
EB2
I140 Mailed Date
:
Chargeability
:
India
Processing Stage
:
N/A
I485 Mailed Date
:
Compare
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 285
amitga has much to be proud of amitga has much to be proud of amitga has much to be proud of amitga has much to be proud of amitga has much to be proud of amitga has much to be proud of amitga has much to be proud of amitga has much to be proud of amitga has much to be proud of
Default

In my view only the following bill will come up for discussion since is is sponsered by the Senate Majority Leader. Rest may just remain in the library


Quote:
Originally Posted by saketkapur View Post

16. S.9 : A bill to strengthen the United States economy, provide for more effective border and employment enforcement, and for other purposes.
Sponsor: Sen Reid, Harry [NV] (introduced 1/6/2009)

Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


  #7 (permalink)  
Old 01-16-2009, 04:42 PM
Senior Member
Priority Date
:
May-06
Category
:
EB2
I140 Mailed Date
:
08/02/2006
Chargeability
:
India
Processing Stage
:
I-485
I485 Mailed Date
:
07/27/2007
Compare
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 417
a_yaja has a brilliant future a_yaja has a brilliant future a_yaja has a brilliant future a_yaja has a brilliant future a_yaja has a brilliant future a_yaja has a brilliant future a_yaja has a brilliant future a_yaja has a brilliant future a_yaja has a brilliant future a_yaja has a brilliant future a_yaja has a brilliant future
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by h1techSlave View Post
I am not trying to say whether this amendment is right or wrong. But the intent of this amendment is to prevent pregnant mothers from crossing the border just for the purpose of ensuring citizenship to the baby. I have also heard my pregnant mothers from Middle Eastern countries come to America just so that their babies are US citizens. They give birth here and go back. The original law was put in the constitution so that former slaves and their new born babies could become citizens rather than being sent back to Africa.

Further, New Zealand recently updated their constitution to stop automatic citizenship by birth clause. In UK, you will not get automatic citizenship unless born to British citizens or permanent residents.

This is the situation in India: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_nationality_law

Both approaches have merits and draw backs.
I have no comments on the intent of the amendment. The lawmakers of this country have the right to propose any changes to the laws of this country. However, changing the constitution is a totally different matter. I am not sure of the process in NZ (or even if citizenship was by birthright in the constitution), but in India it is easy to amend the constitution and very rarely requires any states to participate. In the US, an amendment not only has to pass the house and senate by 2/3rds majority, but it has to be passed by 3/4ths of the US states as well (which is 38 states).

It is a long and tedious process and the founders made it that way so that it cannot be amended by the whim of a few senators and congressmen. In fact the 27th Amendment "Limiting Congressional Pay Increases" was introduced in Sept., 1789 and was ratified only in May 1992. Nowadays, of course, they propose a time limit (usually 7 years) for the amendment - and if it has not been ratified in that time limit, then I guess the amendment fails.
__________________
Greened on 05/04/2011
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


  #8 (permalink)  
Old 01-16-2009, 07:16 PM
Senior Member
Priority Date
:
May-03
Category
:
EB3
I140 Mailed Date
:
07/14/2004
Chargeability
:
India
Processing Stage
:
I-485
I485 Mailed Date
:
07/14/2004
Compare
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 358
jungalee43 has a reputation beyond repute jungalee43 has a reputation beyond repute jungalee43 has a reputation beyond repute jungalee43 has a reputation beyond repute jungalee43 has a reputation beyond repute jungalee43 has a reputation beyond repute jungalee43 has a reputation beyond repute jungalee43 has a reputation beyond repute jungalee43 has a reputation beyond repute jungalee43 has a reputation beyond repute jungalee43 has a reputation beyond repute
Default HR-126 It is annual ritual

Don't waste your time on this. I am following this bill since 2004 and it was out there even before that. It has become an annual ritual in the House. It comes up for vote every year and is defeated in the House itself. No point in wasting time on it.
And anyway it would be a constitutional amendment.

Last edited by jungalee43; 01-16-2009 at 09:25 PM.
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


  #9 (permalink)  
Old 01-17-2009, 12:34 AM
Senior Member
Priority Date
:
Oct-03
Category
:
EB3
I140 Mailed Date
:
10/01/2003
Chargeability
:
Germany
Processing Stage
:
I-140+I-485
I485 Mailed Date
:
10/03/2003
Compare
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 107
Tito_ortiz is infamous around these parts Tito_ortiz is infamous around these parts Tito_ortiz is infamous around these parts
Default

That is not true. The Constitution states that is 'subject to the jurisdiction of'. It is, like many other laws, simply not enforced.

[edit] The Constitution
The Citizenship Clause in the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution states,

"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."

Senator Jacob Howard, who wrote this Citizenship clause, commented:

"This amendment which I have clarified is simply declaratory of what I regard as the law of the land already [...] [It] does 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. It settles the great question of citizenship and removes all doubt as to what persons are or are not citizens of the United States."[4]


Quote:
Originally Posted by a_yaja View Post
This will not fly - citizenship by birth is in the constitution. Unless the constitution is amended, this law has no meaning.
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


  #10 (permalink)  
Old 01-17-2009, 10:13 AM
Senior Member
Priority Date
:
N/A
Category
:
EB1C
I140 Mailed Date
:
12/25/2013
Chargeability
:
India
Processing Stage
:
I-140+I-485
I485 Mailed Date
:
12/25/2013
Compare
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,051
go_guy123 has a reputation beyond repute go_guy123 has a reputation beyond repute go_guy123 has a reputation beyond repute go_guy123 has a reputation beyond repute go_guy123 has a reputation beyond repute go_guy123 has a reputation beyond repute go_guy123 has a reputation beyond repute go_guy123 has a reputation beyond repute go_guy123 has a reputation beyond repute go_guy123 has a reputation beyond repute go_guy123 has a reputation beyond repute
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tito_ortiz View Post
That is not true. The Constitution states that is 'subject to the jurisdiction of'. It is, like many other laws, simply not enforced.

[edit] The Constitution
The Citizenship Clause in the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution states,

"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."

Senator Jacob Howard, who wrote this Citizenship clause, commented:

"This amendment which I have clarified is simply declaratory of what I regard as the law of the land already [...] [It] does 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. It settles the great question of citizenship and removes all doubt as to what persons are or are not citizens of the United States."[4]
http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/top...._Wong_Kim_Ark

Here is the landmark supreme court case that decided the interpreation of the amendment especially the meaning of 'subject to the jurisdiction of'
It mean mainly children of foreign forces/diplomats (foreign govt officials) etc
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


  #11 (permalink)  
Old 01-17-2009, 10:55 AM
Senior Member
Priority Date
:
Oct-03
Category
:
EB3
I140 Mailed Date
:
10/01/2003
Chargeability
:
Germany
Processing Stage
:
I-140+I-485
I485 Mailed Date
:
10/03/2003
Compare
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 107
Tito_ortiz is infamous around these parts Tito_ortiz is infamous around these parts Tito_ortiz is infamous around these parts
Default

The judge or court making that decision just took that interpretation on their own hands. The explanation of the aforementioned wording was explained by the man who wrote the law himself. Again, that is not a surprise given the US is in shambles.

In my own country and probably yours, if you are not born from legalized parents newborns are not allowed to have citizenship rights. That is simply unsustainable especially for large economies.

With the US economy sinking, let's see how long interest groups will continue to distort that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by go_guy123 View Post
http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/top...._Wong_Kim_Ark

Here is the landmark supreme court case that decided the interpreation of the amendment especially the meaning of 'subject to the jurisdiction of'
It mean mainly children of foreign forces/diplomats (foreign govt officials) etc
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


  #12 (permalink)  
Old 01-17-2009, 12:27 PM
Senior Member
Priority Date
:
May-06
Category
:
EB2
I140 Mailed Date
:
08/02/2006
Chargeability
:
India
Processing Stage
:
I-485
I485 Mailed Date
:
07/27/2007
Compare
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 417
a_yaja has a brilliant future a_yaja has a brilliant future a_yaja has a brilliant future a_yaja has a brilliant future a_yaja has a brilliant future a_yaja has a brilliant future a_yaja has a brilliant future a_yaja has a brilliant future a_yaja has a brilliant future a_yaja has a brilliant future a_yaja has a brilliant future
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tito_ortiz View Post
That is not true. The Constitution states that is 'subject to the jurisdiction of'. It is, like many other laws, simply not enforced.
"Subject to the jurisdiction of" means that the laws of the land are applicable to that person. Anyone in the US, legally or illegally is subject to US laws. This means that you have to pay taxes, you can be taken to court for civil matters, you can be tried in criminal courts for crimes committed, etc. Just because a person is on F1 or H1 or any other non-immigrant visa category does not exempt them from US laws. The only officials who are exempt from the law are diplomats and other foreign officials who are not subject to US laws. If such people commit crimes, then the only thing that the US govt. can do is expel them. That is why children born to diplomats and foreign officials who are not "Subject to the jurisdiction of" the United States are not automatic US citizens.
__________________
Greened on 05/04/2011
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


  #13 (permalink)  
Old 01-17-2009, 04:26 PM
Member
Priority Date
:
Dec-06
Category
:
EB2
I140 Mailed Date
:
04/10/2007
Chargeability
:
India
Processing Stage
:
I-140+I-485
I485 Mailed Date
:
07/02/2007
Compare
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 85
oliTwist has a spectacular aura about oliTwist has a spectacular aura about
Default no bills for legal immigration revamp?

Are there any bills like HR6039, HR5882 (in 2008) coming up this time?
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


Reply

Bookmarks


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are On

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
111th Congress and Immigration bills gc_on_demand IV Agenda and Legislative Updates 15 01-14-2009 10:31 AM



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:40 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
(c)ImmigrationVoice.org