New Dustin Inman Society

  • facebook
  • x
  • youtube

"One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics
is that you end up being governed by your inferiors."
Attributed to Plato

WE SUPPORT POLICE OFFICERS • ALL LIVES MATTER

  • Home
  • Sign up for alerts
  • Mission Statement
  • DIS ADVISORY BOARD
  • New DIS Blog
  • Original DIS Blog
  • CONTACT US
Home » You searched for parents » Page 7

Search Results for: parents

DACA finally declared illegal – Center for Immigration Studies

July 19, 2021 By D.A. King

Reminder: Trump promised to end DACA “on day one…”

Center for Immigration Studies

By Robert Law on July 16, 2021

 

More than nine years after it was decreed, federal district judge Andrew Hanen has ruled on the merits that President Obama’s executive amnesty program known as Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA, is illegal.

On June 15, 2012, then-Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Janet Napolitano established DACA through a brief memorandum titled, “Exercising Prosecutorial Discretion with Respect to Individuals Who Came to the United States as Children”. In just three pages, the Napolitano memo unilaterally implemented the general framework of the DREAM Act, amnesty legislation that Congress repeatedly rejected since 2001. Under the guise of prosecutorial discretion against immigration enforcement, DACA also awarded work permits and Social Security numbers to illegal aliens who claimed they entered the country before age 16 and met other criteria. At its peak, almost 800,000 illegal aliens benefited from DACA. According to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services data, there are currently approximately 616,030 illegal aliens who are active DACA recipients.

Emboldened after a few years of DACA operating on autopilot without legal challenge (though with plenty of outside commenters objecting), the Obama administration attempted to expand DACA and also create a new executive amnesty program for the illegal alien parents of U.S. citizen and lawful permanent resident children, known as DAPA. Judge Hanen drew that case and in February 2015 enjoined DAPA and the DACA expansion, finding that it violated the Administrative Procedure Act (APA). As Andrew Arthur previously explained, the Fifth Circuit affirmed Judge Hanen’s ruling in November 2015, which was then affirmed by an evenly divided Supreme Court in 2016. Subsequently, Judge Hanen drew the assignment for the legal challenge to DACA. On August 31, 2018, more than six years after DACA was implemented, Judge Hanen issued an order finding that that DACA likely violates the APA, but given the plaintiffs’ “unreasonable delay in seeking relief”, he declined to issue a preliminary injunction.

While this legal battle played out in south Texas, Donald Trump was elected president and vowed to terminate DACA on “Day One”. That did not happen, but on September 4, 2017, then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions sent then-Acting DHS Secretary Elaine Duke a letteradvising her to rescind DACA, explaining that DACA was “an unconstitutional exercise of authority by the Executive Branch”. The next day, Duke rescinded DACA but delayed the effective date until March 5, 2018, allowing illegal alien DACA recipients whose benefits would have expired before that date to apply for renewal for another month, until October 5, 2017.

That termination was challenged by illegal alien advocates and Andrew Arthur concisely explains the tortured history of the Trump administration’s attempt to end DACA. Eventually the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the Duke memo itself failed the requirements of the APA and directed the Trump administration to try again.

Joe Biden’s electoral victory in November 2020 interrupted those efforts and on his Inauguration Day, Biden issued a presidential memorandum to the AG and DHS secretary “preserving and fortifying” DACA. For nearly six months of the Biden administration, DACA operated in the status quo—the illegal aliens who held its benefits kept them and could renew them.

Now Judge Hanen has finally ruled on the merits, finding that DACA was an “illegally implemented program” and that “the public interest of the nation is always served by the cessation of a program that was created in violation of law and whose existence violates the law.” Despite those strong words, Hanen neuters the impact of his decision, claiming that “[h]undreds of thousands of individual DACA recipients, along with their employers, states, and loved ones, have come to rely on the DACA program.” Based on this flawed reasoning, Hanen concludes:

Given those interests, it is not equitable for a government program that has engendered such a significant reliance to terminate suddenly. This consideration, along with the government’s assertion that it is ready and willing to try to remedy the legal defects of the DACA program indicates that equity will not be served by a complete and immediate cessation of DACA.

Establishing a “reliance interest” for an illegal program for illegal aliens takes the winds out of the sails of advocates for the rule of law. As a result, the current DACA population continues to keep their (illegal) benefits (although no new applications may be approved), making Hanen’s ruling yet another mostly symbolic victory.

With certain Republican senators already expressing a willingness to amnesty the DACA population, despite similarly concluding that the program is unlawful, it remains to be seen if the Democratic leadership will now entertain a narrower bill in light of Judge Hanen’s ruling.

Entire write up here.

Filed Under: Older Entires

Illegal immigration: House committee to consider SB 107 and no-cost postsecondary education for foster care students – while Biden has borders open to UACs

March 16, 2021 By D.A. King

Biden’s border officials project 13,000 child migrants in May. Text and photo: Axios.

 

SB 107 is scheduled to be heard in the House Higher Education Committee tomorrow, March 17, 2021 at 1:00 PM. This is the same committee that passed out HB 120, the “lower tuition for illegal aliens than Americans” bill that has not yet seen a floor vote.

We suggest changes to SB 107.

Our antenna go up when we see an op-ed embedded in proposed law. SB 107 from Senator Brian Strickland and his cosponsors  is a prime example. Generally, the bill is aimed at providing no cost postsecondary education (*USG (urging language)& TCSG) to young people who have been adopted or are/were in foster care in Georgia. No tuition, no fees.

Here is a sample of the op-ed language in SB 107 – starting on line 15 (LC 49 0418S (SCS))

SECTION 1.  

“Article 12 of Chapter 3 of Title 20 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated, relating to  postsecondary education grants for foster children and adopted children, is amended by repealing CodeSection20-3-660, relating to program of grants created, terms and conditions, applications, eligibility, duties of the Division of Family and Children Services, expenses and fees covered, and report by the Education Coordinating Council, and enacting a new Code  Section 20-3-660 to read as follows:

(a) It is the policy of the General Assembly that resources of this state should be committed to support benefits and positive outcomes for youth who age out of foster care.

A postsecondary education can benefit these youth, many of whom who have come from  places of great disadvantage; however, too few have been able to realize the benefit.

Therefore, the General Assembly establishes this program to support as many of these  youth as possible in realizing the benefits of postsecondary education. The General Assembly urges and recommends that the Board of Regents adopt substantially similar  tuition waiver programs for these youth to realize the benefits of postsecondary education in the University System of Georgia.”

End on line 30.

Georgia ranks number seven in states with its illegal alien population. We are home to more illegal aliens than Arizona – and more illegals than green card holders. We are an illegal alien destination because the state laws put in place to make us inhospitable to illegal immigration are largely ignored by the Republicans in power and because along with the Metro Atlanta Chamber, the Georgia Chamber of Commerce runs most policy decisions under the Gold Dome.

Migrant detention. Photo: ABC News

Many of whom are destined to become Georgia residents and likely under foster care, unaccompanied alien children (UACs) are streaming over the southern border as I type because the Democrats are essentially open borders radicals and are fortifying their future voter rolls. It is important to note that last year’s “children in cages” is now “temporary shelters for migrant children…” under Biden.

Here is a blurb from the WaPo on the swelling crisis that ‘isn’t a crisis:’

Washington Post

March 13, 2021

Biden will deploy FEMA to care for teenagers and children crossing border in record numbers

“The Biden administration is deploying the Federal Emergency Management Agency to the Mexican border to help care for thousands of unaccompanied migrant teens and children who are arriving in overwhelming numbers and being packed into detention cells and tent shelters, the Department of Homeland Security said Saturday evening.

The deployment marks another escalation in the administration’s response to the growing crisis at the border. It is part of what DHS said would be a 90-day government-wide effort at the border, where an unprecedented number of minors are arriving without their parents each day and must be sheltered and cared for until they can be placed with a vetted sponsor, usually a parent or relative already living in the United States.” Here.

And:

noqreport.com

Biden’s border crisis: 2021 on pace for more unaccompanied children than Trump’s four years combined

“2019 was the worst year on record for UACs (Unaccompanied Alien Children). At the pace that UACs are flooding across the border today, the Biden administration will blow that number out of the water. In fact, he’s on pace for TRIPLING the worst year ever.” Here

Already passed in the Republican-controlled senate, SB 107 is scheduled to be heard in the House Higher Education Committee Wednesday, March 17 (tomorrow). It can and should be improved and “illegal alien-proofed.” We have experienced and serious doubts that illegal immigration was any part of consideration in the senate. Senate vote record here.

While we do not claim to be experts on Family and Children’s Services, foster care or adoption, we do know about illegal immigration and that SB 107 is in urgent need of changes.

Fact: Most Georgians will take a dim view of a law that allows illegal aliens to attend post secondary education institutions at no cost while Americans and legal immigrants pay. SB 107 needs a belt and suspenders.

Our suggested changes to SB 107 – sent to some of the Republicans (including the Chairman) on the Higher Ed committee members below. 

 

 

GA state Senator Brian Strickland. Photo: GA senate. Sponsor, SB107

 

SB 107  Suggested changes LC 49 0418S (SCS)  

Add sentence that goes something like:

“eligibility for benefits under this code section shall limited to students and applicants who are U.S. citizens, lawful permanent residents as defined by the federal government and foreign nationals who have legal immigration status as determined by federal law…applicants who have deferred action on enforcement of U.S. immigration laws shall not be eligible to apply…”

More suggested changes:

* Line 38 should be changed to include “all of”

code section for each foster child or adopted child who meets all of the following requirements:

* Lines 59 & 60 look very muddy. Should read that student must qualify for FAFSA – not merely complete the application.

* Lines 58-64:

“5) The student completes a simplified application process established by the Division

of Family and Children Services, which shall include completion of the Free Application

for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA) to determine the level of need and eligibility for state  (It looks like illegal aliens d/n qualify for FAFSA, but the bill only says they must complete the FAFSA application – not be approved. Illegals could complete the app, and still receive no cost college?) and federal financial aid programs; provided, however, that a student who is presumptively eligible to participate in the waiver program shall be permitted to provisionally participate in the waiver program for a period of up to 30 days pending the student’s completion of the application process.”

* Starting on line 60, this language should be struck: to determine the level of need and eligibility for state  

and federal financial aid programs; provided, however, that a student who is  

presumptively eligible to participate in the waiver program shall be permitted to  

provisionally participate in the waiver program for a period of up to 30 days pending the  

student’s completion of the application process.

*Updated to explain what the urging language on USG.

Filed Under: Older Entires

How the instate tuition law would read if HB120 were passed today – Feb 20, 2021 LC 49 0393S

February 20, 2021 By D.A. King

 

Dalton Rep Kasey (R) Carpenter presenting HB 120 to the House Higher Education Committee. Feb 19, 2021

PROPOSED: OCGA 20-3-66. Determination of in-state resident status of students for tuition or fees

 

(a) As used in this Code section, the term:

1) “Dependent student” means an individual under the age of 24 who receives financial support from a parent or United States court appointed legal guardian.

2) “Emancipated” means a minor who, under certain circumstances, may be treated by the law as an adult. A student reaching the age of 18 shall not qualify for consideration of reclassification by virtue of having become emancipated unless he or she can demonstrate financial independence and domicile independent of his or her parents.

(3) “Independent student” means an individual who is not claimed as a dependent on the federal or state income tax returns of a parent or United States court appointed legal guardian and whose parent or guardian has ceased to provide support and right to that individual’s care, custody, and earnings.

b)

(1) An independent student who has established and maintained a domicile in the State of Georgia for a period of at least 12 consecutive months immediately preceding the first day of classes for the term shall be classified as in-state for tuition purposes. No student shall gain or acquire in-state classification while attending any postsecondary educational institution in this state without clear evidence of having established domicile in Georgia for purposes other than attending a postsecondary educational institution in this state.

(2) If an independent student classified as in-state for tuition purposes relocates out of state temporarily but returns to the State of Georgia within 12 months of the relocation, such student shall be entitled to retain his or her in-state tuition classification.

(c) (1) A dependent student shall be classified as in-state for tuition purposes if such dependent student’s parent has established and maintained domicile in the State of Georgia for at least 12 consecutive months immediately preceding the first day of classes for the term and:

(A) The student has graduated from a Georgia high school; or

(B) The parent claimed the student as a dependent on the parent’s most recent federal or state income tax return.

(2) A dependent student shall be classified as in-state for tuition purposes if such student’s United States court appointed legal guardian has established and maintained domicile in the State of Georgia for at least 12 consecutive months immediately preceding the first day of classes for the term, provided that such appointment was not made to avoid payment of out-of-state tuition, and such guardian can provide clear evidence of having established and maintained domicile in the State of Georgia for a period of at least 12 consecutive months immediately preceding the first day of classes for the term.

(3) If the parent or United States court appointed legal guardian of a dependent student currently classified as in-state for tuition purposes establishes domicile outside of the State of Georgia after having established and maintained domicile in the State of Georgia, such student may retain his or her in-state tuition classification so long as such student remains continuously enrolled in a public postsecondary educational institution in this state, regardless of the domicile of such student’s parent or United States court appointed legal guardian.

Begin proposed new language:

(d) Except as provided in subsections (b) and (c) of this Code section, a student shall be classified for in-state tuition purposes if he or she satisfies all of the following conditions:

(1) Is not seeking admission to any institution of the University System of Georgia identified by the board of regents as a research university;

(2) Has graduated from a Georgia high school or obtained a valid Georgia general educational development (GED) diploma;

(3) Has independently established and maintained domicile in this state since January 1, 2013, or is the dependent child of a parent who has established and maintained domicile in this state since January 1, 2013;

(4) Has not reached the age of 30 years at the time of initial application for admission to a postsecondary educational institution; and

(5) Is not a nonimmigrant alien within the meaning of 8 U.S.C. Section 1101.

(6) Meets the eligibility criteria set by the United States Department of Homeland Security for deferred action in enforcement of federal immigration laws.

(e) The board of regents is authorized to classify for in-state for tuition purposes a  noncitizen student who is lawfully present in this state and who submits evidence to  warrant consideration of in-state classification.

(Said title is further amended in Code Section 20-4-21, relating to tuition fees, by adding a new subsection to read as follows:)

“(d)(1) Notwithstanding any other law to the contrary, the State Board of the Technical College System of Georgia is authorized to classify a student for in-state tuition purposes if he or she satisfies all of the following conditions:

(A) Has graduated from a Georgia high school or obtained a valid Georgia general educational development (GED) diploma;

(B) Has independently established and maintained domicile in this state since January 1, 2013, or is the dependent child of a parent who has established and maintained domicile in this state since January 1, 2013;

(C) Has not reached the age of 30 years at the time of initial application for admission to a postsecondary educational institution; and

(D) Is not a nonimmigrant alien within the meaning of 8 U.S.C. Section 1101.

(2) The State Board of the Technical College System of Georgia is authorized to classify for in-state for tuition purposes a noncitizen student who is lawfully present in this state and who submits evidence to warrant consideration of in-state classification.

(3) Nothing in this Code section shall be construed to require in-state tuition classification for individuals not lawfully present in Georgia.”

 

 

 

Filed Under: Older Entires

BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP

Please see the three-minute video from the Heritage Foundation embedded below (sorry about narrow page, but after you click play arrow, the entire screen is visible) then see the article from former immigration judge and CIS Fellow, Art Arthur below it.

_____________

Birthright Citizenship: An Overview

By Andrew R. Arthur on November 5, 2018

Download a PDF of this Backgrounder.


Andrew R. Arthur is a resident fellow in law and policy at the Center for Immigration Studies.


Summary

  • The issue of birthright citizenship, as it pertains to children born in the United States to aliens unlawfully present, remains an open question. Although this fact would appear to be resolved in the public imagination, it has not actually been ruled upon dispositively by the Supreme Court. President Trump’s assertion that he would end birthright citizenship by an as-yet-unpublished executive order has brought this issue into focus. Should he issue such an executive order, it would provide the Supreme Court the opportunity to resolve the issue once and for all.
  • Citizenship is currently offered to all children who are born in 39 countries (with the exception of children of diplomats), most of which are in the Western Hemisphere. No country in Western Europe offers birthright citizenship without exceptions to all children born within their borders.1
  • Many countries, including France, New Zealand, and Australia, have abandoned birthright citizenship in the past few decades.2 Ireland was the last country in the European Union to follow the practice, abolishing birthright citizenship in 2005.3
  • The costs of births for the children of illegal aliens is staggering. The Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) estimates that in 2014, $2.35 billion in taxpayer funding went to pay for more than 273,000 births to illegal immigrants.4

Introduction

President Trump’s recent pronouncement that he plans to sign an executive order to end birthright citizenship has brought that issue, which has been debated for the last 150 years, to the fore. According to Quartz, 39 countries currently offer citizenship to persons born therein, with the exception of children of diplomats, most of which are in the Western Hemisphere.5

Most of our major allies do not follow the practice. The Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) World Factbook, for example, states that Germany does not offer citizenship by birth, and offers citizenship by descent only if at least one parent is a German citizen or a resident alien who has lived in Germany for at least eight years.6 Similarly, according to the CIA, the United Kingdom does not offer birthright citizenship, and offers citizenship by descent only if at least one parent is a citizen of the United Kingdom.7

As The Atlantic has noted, many countries that used to have birthright citizenship have done away with the practice.8 It explains:

France did away with birthright citizenship in 1993, following the passage of the Méhaignerie Law. The law limited citizenship to those born to a French parent, or to a parent also born in France. As a result, those born in France to foreign-born parents must wait until they turn 18 to automatically acquire French citizenship (a process that can begin when they turn 13, if they apply).

Ireland was the last of the European Union countries to abolish birthright citizenship, in 2005. Through a referendum backed by nearly 80 percent of Irish voters, citizenship was limited to those born to at least one Irish parent. The decision was a response to a controversy surrounding birth tourism and the high-profile case of Man Levette Chen, a Chinese national who traveled to Northern Ireland so that her daughter would be born an Irish citizen. Chen sought residency rights in Britain, citing her child’s Irish and EU citizenship. Though the United Kingdom Home Office rejected Chen’s application, the decision was overturned by the European Court of Justice in 2004.

Other countries, including New Zealand and Australia, have also abolished their birthright-citizenship laws in recent years. The latest is the Dominican Republic, whose supreme court ruled to remove the country’s birthright laws in 2013. The decision retroactively stripped tens of thousands of people born to undocumented foreign parents of their citizenship and rendered them “ghost citizens,” according to Amnesty International.

Benefits of U.S. Citizenship

United States citizenship is one of, if not the, most exulted and prized statuses in the world. Citizenship in this country offers the most significant economic opportunities. It guarantees the fullest protection of our laws and of the security afforded by our military servicemen and -women around the world. And, most importantly, it provides the chance to participate in the world’s oldest existing democracy.9

As an immigration judge, I was honored to have had the authority and opportunity to administer the oath of allegiance and renunciation to new citizens.10 In addition, I was often called upon to adjudicate cases in which an individual charged as an alien with removability claimed instead to be a citizen of the United States, either by birth or derivation.

Significantly, while there are many benefits that the Constitution and laws of the United States grant to both citizens and aliens, certain benefits are available only to U.S. citizens. These include the right to vote, priority when it comes to bringing family members to the United States, the ability to convey citizenship to a child born abroad, travel with a U.S. passport, and eligibility for most federal jobs and elected offices.11

More prosaically, U.S. citizens have access to many forms of government benefits that are not, as a rule, available to aliens, even to many aliens lawfully present in the United States.12 Specifically, citizens are not subject to restrictions for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP, formerly food stamps), the Supplemental Security Income (SSI) program, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) cash assistance, and Medicaid that apply to certain categories of aliens in the United States.13 In addition, citizens are not barred from receiving federal student aid, as certain aliens are.14

Most significantly, however, U.S. citizens are not amenable to removal from the United States, unless they have been denaturalized.15

Becoming a Citizen

Understanding the benefits of U.S. citizenship, the question is then how one becomes a citizen. As the Congressional Research Service (CRS) has explained: “United States citizenship is conferred at birth both under the principle of jus soli (nationality of place of birth) and the principle of jus sanguinis (nationality of parents).”16 With respect to these individuals, section 301 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) states that:

The following shall be nationals and citizens of the United States at birth:

(a) a person born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof;

(b) a person born in the United States to a member of an Indian, Eskimo, Aleutian, or other aboriginal tribe: Provided, That the granting of citizenship under this subsection shall not in any manner impair or otherwise affect the right of such person to tribal or other property;

(c) a person born outside of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents both of whom are citizens of the United States and one of whom has had a residence in the United States or one of its outlying possessions, prior to the birth of such person;

(d) a person born outside of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is a citizen of the United States who has been physically present in the United States or one of its outlying possessions for a continuous period of one year prior to the birth of such person, and the other of whom is a national, but not a citizen of the United States;

(e) a person born in an outlying possession of the United States of parents one of whom is a citizen of the United States who has been physically present in the United States or one of its outlying possessions for a continuous period of one year at any time prior to the birth of such person;

(f) a person of unknown parentage found in the United States while under the age of five years, until shown, prior to his attaining the age of twenty-one years, not to have been born in the United States;

(g) a person born outside the geographical limits of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is an alien, and the other a citizen of the United States who, prior to the birth of such person, was physically present in the United States or its outlying possessions for a period or periods totaling not less than five years, at least two of which were after attaining the age of fourteen years: Provided, That any periods of honorable service in the Armed Forces of the United States, or periods of employment with the United States Government or with an international organization as that term is defined in section 1 of the International Organizations Immunities Act (59 Stat. 669; 22 U.S.C. 288) by such citizen parent, or any periods during which such citizen parent is physically present abroad as the dependent unmarried son or daughter and a member of the household of a person (A) honorably serving with the Armed Forces of the United States, or (B) employed by the United States Government or an international organization as defined in section 1 of the International Organizations Immunities Act, may be included in order to satisfy the physical-presence requirement of this paragraph. This proviso shall be applicable to persons born on or after December 24, 1952, to the same extent as if it had become effective in its present form on that date; and

(h) a person born before noon (Eastern Standard Time) May 24, 1934, outside the limits and jurisdiction of the United States of an alien father and a mother who is a citizen of the United States who, prior to the birth of such person, had resided in the United States.17

In addition, as noted, aliens may become naturalized citizens18 and “[o]n occasion, Congress has collectively naturalized the population of a territory upon its acquisition by the United States, though in these instances individuals have at times been given the option of retaining their former nationality.”19

Birthright Citizenship Generally

The first group of individuals identified under section 301(a) of the INA as nationals and citizens at birth, generally, is the group that receives the most public attention20 and the one that raises the most significant public policy issues.21

Section 301(a) of the INA tracks the language in the first sentence of the first section of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution, which 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.”22

Because of the ambiguous nature of the language used therein, the second clause of this section has been the primary source of disagreement with respect to the intent and scope of this section. Those who are proponents of birthright citizenship for all those born within the United States (except the children of diplomats and enemy aliens on conquered territory) contend that simply being born on U.S. soil is sufficient to convey citizenship.23 As CRS has noted, though:

[D]riven in part by concerns about unauthorized immigration, some have questioned this understanding of the Citizenship Clause, and in particular the meaning of “subject to the jurisdiction [of the United States].” Proponents of a narrower reinterpretation of that phrase argue that the term “jurisdiction” can have multiple meanings, and that in the Citizenship Clause, “jurisdiction” should be read to mean “complete jurisdiction” based on undivided allegiance and the mutual consent of the sovereign and the subject. This has been termed a “consensual” approach to citizenship.

Background to the Fourteenth Amendment

A review of the background of the origins of the Fourteenth Amendment is helpful in framing these arguments. First, as CRS explains:

The original framers of the U.S. Constitution referenced, but did not define, national citizenship. The Constitution required that a person have been a citizen of the United States for seven years to be a Representative and for nine years to be a Senator, and that a person be a natural-born citizen or a citizen at the time of the adoption of the Constitution in order to be eligible to be President. It also gave Congress the power to establish a uniform rule of naturalization, but naturalization refers to the manner in which a non-citizen acquires citizenship, rather than citizenship by birth. Nor did the Naturalization Act of 1790 or subsequent acts until the Civil Rights Act of 1866 define citizenship by birth within the United States. In the absence of any statement in the Constitution or federal statutes that U.S. citizenship was acquired by right of birth in the United States, citizenship at birth generally was construed in the context of the English common law. As noted by the Supreme Court, “[t]he interpretation of the Constitution of the United States is necessarily influenced by the fact that its provisions are framed in the language of the English common law, and are to be read in the light of its history.”

…

These birthright citizenship principles were not extended to slaves, or generally to Native Americans.24

Specifically, in Dred Scott v. Sandford, the Supreme Court considered a suit brought by the plaintiff Scott, who was a slave in Missouri, but who had lived in the free state of Illinois and in a section of the Louisiana Territory where slavery was outlawed by the Missouri Compromise of 1820, seeking his freedom.25 As the Court stated:

The question is simply this: Can a negro, whose ancestors were imported into this country, and sold as slaves, become a member of the political community formed and brought into existence by the Constitution of the United States, and as such become entitled to all the rights, and privileges, and immunities, guarantied [sic] by that instrument to the citizen? One of which rights is the privilege of suing in a court of the United States in the cases specified in the Constitution.26

It concluded:

In the opinion of the court, the legislation and histories of the times, and the language used in the Declaration of Independence, show, that neither the class of persons who had been imported as slaves, nor their descendants, whether they had become free or not, were then acknowledged as a part of the people, nor intended to be included in the general words used in that memorable instrument.27

To overrule the Court’s conclusion in Dred Scott “that African Americans were not citizens of the United States … Congress enacted, over the veto of President Andrew Johnson, the Civil Rights Act” of 1866, 14 Stat. 27, ch. 31 (Apr. 9, 1866).28 It stated, in pertinent part: “All persons born in the United States, and not subject to any foreign power, excluding Indians not taxed, are hereby declared to be citizens of the United States.”29

In April 29, 2015, testimony before the House Judiciary Committee’s Subcommittee on Immigration and Border Security, Professor John C. Eastman explained:

As this formulation makes clear, any child born on U.S. soil to parents who were temporary visitors to this country and who, as a result of the foreign citizenship of the child’s parents, remained a citizen or subject of the parents’ home country, was not entitled to claim the birthright citizenship provided in the 1866 Act.30

Legislative History of the Fourteenth Amendment… Please read the rest here, from CIS.org

 

Who was Dustin Inman?

The Inman family, circa 2000.

Note: Mr. Billy Inman, Dustin’s Dad, is quoted here. Billy Inman passed away in June, 2019. RIP

Update: Kathy Inman, Dustin’s Mom, had to be moved to a nursing facility in Spring, 2021 and passed away in August, 2021 as a direct result of her 2000 injuries.

This page is taken from the original DIS website which was put online in 2005.

Dustin Inman was one of the un-counted thousands of Americans who have needlessly lost their lives because government in America refuses to secure American borders or enforce American immigration and employment laws.

Dustin Inman was a sixteen-year-old American boy killed by an illegal alien in a senseless traffic collision on Father’s Day weekend in the year 2000.

He was on his way to a weekend of fishing in the North Georgia mountains with his parents.

Despite being in the United States illegally, the driver of the car that killed Dustin, Gonzalo Harrell-Gonzalez, was able to obtain a valid North Carolina driver’s license using his Mexican birth certificate and a Mexican Matricula Consular ID card.

On June 16, 2000, a speeding vehicle driven by Harrell-Gonzalez hurtled into the rear of the Inman family’s car while it was stopped at a red light in Ellijay, Georgia – killing Dustin and knocking unconscious Kathy and Billy Inman – Dustin’s parents. See our Mission statement and information about what The Dustin Inman Society does.

When she regained consciousness after five weeks in a coma, Kathy learned of the death of her son and that because of spinal injuries received in the wreck that killed him, she would spend the rest of her life in a wheelchair.

Because of their injuries in the wreck, Kathy and Billy were not able to attend their only son’s funeral.

Billy Inman will tell you that he blames the government sworn to protect him and his family for his son’s death more than he blames the illegal alien who killed him.

The Inman’s have only a few school photos, family snapshots and a video made at Dustin’s funeral by which to remember their son.

America’s un-secured borders and illegal immigration have changed their lives forever. It can happen to any one of us.

Billy Inman will tell you that Dustin was a “good kid” and that he misses his “hunting buddy” everyday. “I loved Dustin,” says Billy often. He talks about Dustin having been born with a cleft palate, and getting him the surgery to get his son “all fixed up”.

He says that he will not rest until he brings his son’s killer to justice.

He will also tell you that he “paid no attention to politics” and had never voted before he lost his son to America’s intentionally un-secured borders.

“The system really let me down,” says Billy Inman.

In his search for a better life, he now votes in every election.

Charged and indicted in the death of Dustin Inman, Gonzalo Harrell-Gonzalez is a fugitive after escaping from local police when taken to a local hospital after the crash. His whereabouts are unknown.

Like all crime, illegal immigration has consequences.

With the Inman family’s blessing, The Dustin Inman Society has been created to help educate the public and elected officials on those consequences and the often-ignored reality of the true cost of our virtually open borders and “cheap labor”.

We often wonder what our grandfathers would say about the state of our nation.

It only took one illegal alien to kill Dustin Inman. We ask: how will we know when we have enough illegal aliens in our republic?

Elsewhere on our Website, you will find a partial list of other Americans killed by illegal aliens. We desperately want to be able to stop adding names to that dreadful list.

We hope that our efforts will help force the President and our federal government to secure our borders and our Governor and state government to do all it can to discourage the millions of illegal aliens in our nation from coming into or remaining in our state.

Note to all elected officials: we are part of a growing majority of voters that regard doing nothing to stop illegal immigration into the U.S. – or Georgia – as the same as encouraging illegal immigration.

Illegal immigration is not a “federal problem”… it is a national problem, and Georgia has one of the largest and fastest growing populations of illegal aliens – and those who encourage and profit from them – in the nation.

Illegal immigration is a crime and it is national suicide.

Enough.

______

2016 letter to Billy Inman from the U.S. Dept. of Justice telling him his son’s killer has been located and is hiding in Mexico. He will not be returned to the U.S., here.

 

 

WSB TV news video- 2016

See our Mission statement and information about what The Dustin Inman Society does.

  • « Previous Page
  • 1
  • …
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7

AMNESTY

Barbara Jordan on illegal immigration – Audio from CIS.org ‘Who Was Barbara Jordan and Why Does Her Work Still Matter Today?’

“ILLEGAL ALIEN”

Image: Dreamstime.com

Know the media

Immigration amnesty education

MEDIA WATCH

BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP

BLACK LIVES MATTER * ANTI-ENFORCEMENT

May Day rally in San Francisco, CA, 2017. CREDIT: Pax Ahimsa Gethen (CC).

The Illegal Alien Lobby

THE ILLEGAL ALIEN LOBBY

11th Circuit Appellate Court: DACA: NO LAWFUL PRESENCE, NO LEGAL STATUS

Image: Wikipedia

The Dustin Inman Society Blog

D.A. King, 1 April 1952 – 5 March 2025

March 23, 2025 By Fred

We are sorry to inform you that D.A. King, President and founder of the Dustin Inman Society, has left us.

Donald (“D.A.”) Arthur King, 1 April 1952 – 5 March 2025.

D.A. King left this life and his work for the nation that he loved, confident that he has done his best. D.A. passed on peacefully after a private battle with cancer.

“Once a Marine, always a Marine” – D.A. was always visibly proud of his service and his honorable discharge from the U.S. Marine Corps (1970-1976).

D.A. described himself as “pro-enforcement” on immigration and borders, an issue on which he dedicated the last 21 years of his life as an expert activist, writer and public speaker.


D.A. King talks amnesty, “hate” and “immigrants” with Jorge Ramos on Univision

https://youtu.be/w6FPMn0h4fk

Illegal immigration is not healthy for Americans

Brian Kemp’s first TV campaign ad, 2018

https://youtu.be/Gx7TsHCH35w

Dustin Inman Society page A-1, New York Times

Photo: New York Times/Twitter

Feb. 21, 2023 National Press Club Panel: OVERRUN – “The Greatest Border Crisis in History” From the Center for Immigration Studies

https://youtu.be/seND4qGrvxY

John Stossell: The Southern Poverty Law Center is a scam

https://youtu.be/k41PI54ExFc

The Great Terry Anderson (RIP) on illegal immigration in Los Angeles. – 2009

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dUEl8WYDDus

Terry Anderson video, part 2 – Birthright Citizenship

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6SS-5u8CMB4

RECENT BLOG ENTRIES

Open records request to TCSG Dec 2, 2024 – “We anticipate having the documents you are requesting to you no later than Friday the 13th of December. “- “At this time, the requested records do not exist.”

Welcoming Illegal immigration to Georgia with special treatment on college tuition

Retraction demand letter to Atlanta Journal Constitution newspaper (updated, Nov. 2, 5:55 AM)

Media request sent to Technical College System of Georgia – OCGA 50-36-1 – Employers in Apprenticeship program — Updated with response

Open records request of Sept. 24, 2024 to TCSG, Re: HDAP, employer docs and response OCGA 50-36-1 – SB 497

COBB COUNTY SHERIFF CRAIG OWENS IS A DANGEROUS MAN

The AJC was the ‘Dinner Chair’ for the 2004 Atlanta MALDEF fundraiser

Response from Senior Admissions Counselor at the College of Coastal Georgia to inquiry regarding Dual Enrollment, illegal aliens and no-cost classes

Open records request sent to TCSG on July 8, 2024 Re: Compliance with new language added to OCGA 56-36-1 in 2024 SB 497

Media request sent to the Technical College System of Georgia (TCSG) Re: Comment on the Addition of “Apprenticeships” to list of public benefits, OCGA 50-36-1 *Updated with reply

Open Records request sent to the Cobb County Sheriff’s office 4:56 AM, Thursday, June 6, 2024. 287(g) – Updated with response(s)

Biden violates federal law to give millions of migrants work permits

The Dustin Inman Society on the CIS podcast with Jessica Vaughan: HB 1105 and SB 354 – “Enforcement works!”

Why Are the Charities Enabling Illegal Immigration Still Tax-Exempt?

Tyler O’Neil: SPLC Fought Reforms That Might Have Helped Prevent Laken Riley’s Death, Immigration Activist Says

GALEO Inc. donors include the SPLC – $100,000

D.A. King in The Federalist this week: Laken Hope Riley’s Murder Outs Georgia As Largely A Sanctuary State

We remember: Candidate Brian Kemp’s 1st TV campaign ad, 2018 GOP Primary “Conservative candidate Brian Kemp will …enforce the ban on sanctuary cities.”

Illegal Immigration in GA: Dustin Inman Society Statewide Poll of Georgia GOP primary voters – Conducted by Landmark Communications Feb 13-15, 2024

It’s not 1859 – Let’s raise the pay for farmworkers who are here legally

Unaccompanied Alien Children (UACs) released into GA, 2020-2023 – data from U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services

The SPLC is funding “Latinx” groups to advance foreign language voting

‘Terrorist Entry Through the Southwest Border’ – audio interview with expert Todd Bensman of CIS

Open records request GADOL (#3) – Affidavits/EADs *Updated

List of media members to whom we sent a “news tip” on GA Gov. Brian Kemp ignoring Dem sheriff’s open violation of state law, OCGA 42-4-14

Dustin Inman Society featured in Breitbart story: “For example, King is now trying to get the GOP governor of Georgia, Brian Kemp, to enforce a Georgia law that requires sheriffs to report jailed illegals to the federal government”

We have serious compliance problems in Georgia OCGA 42-4-14

Illegal alien captured in Gwinnett County, GA, detected by 287(g): Aggravated child molestation by sodomy, from ICE report


OLDER ENTRIES


REMEMBERING BARBARA JORDAN ON IMMIGRATION

Barbara Jordan. (Biography.com) "Those who should get in, get in; those who should be kept out, are kept out; and those who should not be here will be required to leave." - Testimony of the late Barbara Jordan, Chair, U.S. Commission on Immigration Reform on February 24, 1995.

ORIGINAL WEBSITE

The Dustin Inman Society Logo

Video

ACCUSED KILLER OF DUSTIN INMAN WILL NOT BE RETURNED TO THE U.S.

Associated Press: “Some illegal immigrants can get Georgia driver’s licenses”

Georgia drivers license issued to non-citizens. Photo DDS

GEORGIA LAW REQUIRES JAILERS TO REPORT ILLEGAL ALIEN PRISONERS TO DHS

MAKE YOUR VOICE HEARD!

testlll
CLICK BUTTON TO SEE LATEST ACTION NEEDED

Follow these other immigration experts on Twitter

contact georgia state legislators

State House Reps and state senators – contact georgia state legislators here.

If you don’t know who represents your and your family in Atlanta, you can find out here.

Contact the Georgia Delegation in Washington

Contact info for the Georgia delegation in Washington DC here. Just click on their name.

Copyright © 2025 All Rights Reserved • Web Pages by Classic Impressions • www.thedustininmansociety.org

 

Loading Comments...
 

You must be logged in to post a comment.