I have a question. I should know the answer but I can't dig it up in this little pea-brain of mine.

If a mother and/or father are U.S. citizens, and they have a child who happens to be born in a different country, is the child automatically a U.S. citizen?

If both are citizens, YES. If only one is, it depends on the number of years the citizen lived in the States and when in his life those years occurred. All of this if IRC.

Yes. I know this because my mom was born in Denmark. (Unless THIS makes me an illegal alien as opposed to just an old slut .) http://www.talkabouttennis.com/forum...reekingout.gif

....AND THUS saith the albeit barely hangin' in there young slut.

Thanks. http://forum.talkabouttennis.com/ima...lies/smile.png

Judge Blocks Part of AZ Immigration Law
 

Jul 28, 2010 10:17 am US/
Pacific Judge Blocks Parts Of Arizona Immigration Law
AMANDA MYERS, Associated Press Writers

PHOENIX (AP) ― A judge has blocked the most controversial sections of Arizona's new immigration law from taking effect Thursday, handing a major legal victory to opponents of the crackdown.

The law will still take effect Thursday, but without many of the provisions that angered opponents — including sections that required officers to check a person's immigration status while enforcing other laws. The judge also put on hold a part of the law that required immigrants to carry their papers at all times, and made it illegal for undocumented workers to solicit employment in public places.

U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton put those controversial sections on hold until the courts resolve the issues.

Opponents say the law will lead to racial profiling and is trumped by federal immigration law.

http://cbs5.com/wireapnational/Judge...2.1828122.html

Looks like the largest (and most controversial) portions of the law were put on hold for now. Be interested in seeing what the judge's thinking is, and how soon she is scheduling hearings on the bill. All this is, I believe, is a temporary injunction barring enforcement.

There was a segment on CNN yesterday about what opponents had planned to combat some of these provisions. One of them was to make sure bunches and bunches and bunches of legal folks committed little crimes and make sure they had no documentation on them whatsoever so they would completely bog down the system and force authorities to waste massive quantities of time verifying their legal status. I thought that was hilarious.

I read this on the NYT website this afternoon. I have to say, I for one and glad to this has been put on hold, and I hope it gets overturned. Especially since more states (including my own) are looking at creating similar legislation.

http://www.talkabouttennis.com/forum...ilies/hyst.gif
I hadn't heard that, but too find it hilarious. While I am not generally pro-crime, I have to say I admire those people who are willing to get themselves into trouble to take a stand (as long as it is petty and non-violent, of course).

Yeah, I'm a big fan of civil disobedience, as long as I don't have to drive in it or around it. I don't know what crimes they had in mind. But I want to have dinner with the person who thought up the idea. My kind of peeps. http://forum.talkabouttennis.com/ima...lies/smile.png