Dispelling “Anchor Baby” Myths

The Pew Hispanic Center, which conducts stellar research on everything from health care to religion, released a report today quantifying just how many children are born in the U.S. to illegal immigrants. The report comes in the midst of a campaign by some Republicans to hold congressional hearings on whether children born to illegal immigrants should automatically become citizens. According to the Pew report, 340,000 babies were born in the U.S. in 2008 to at least one undocumented parent. And of all the children of undocumented immigrants in the U.S., about 80% were born here – the rest were born abroad.

These are significant numbers and they seem to add an arrow to the quiver of those in Congress and elsewhere now suggesting the 14th Amendment of the Constitution should be changed so that anyone born in the U.S. does not automatically become a citizen. Republican Sen. Lindsay Graham has been a leading voice on this idea, recently saying on Fox News:

“People come here to have babies. They come here to drop a child. It’s called ‘drop and leave.’ To have a child in America, they cross the border, they go to the emergency room, have a child, and that child’s automatically an American citizen. That shouldn’t be the case. That attracts people here for all the wrong reasons.”

But before rushing into that debate, Pew figures in hand, there are a few glaring questions unanswered by this new data set. For starters, how long were these illegal immigrant mothers in the U.S. before their children were born? The report itself does not answer this crucial question, so I called Jeff Passel, co-author of the report. He told me that based on the years that the report’s underlying data was produced, he knows that “well over 80%” of the 340,000 births cited in the report happened to women who had been in the U.S. more than one year. That blows a giant hole in the notion that mothers are crossing the U.S.-Mexican border just in time to give birth in American hospitals.

Another central question that’s not being explored right now – perhaps because while changing the 14th Amendment might score political points, it’s logistically incredibly difficult – is whether birthright citizenship actually exacerbates illegal immigration. Think about the term “anchor baby” – doesn’t it imply that having a baby in the U.S. who gets citizenship creates an foothold for undocumented parents, who might otherwise be more easily deported? Undocumented immigrants can get federal funds to help pay for health care and food for their citizen children, but most have no easier way to gain citizenship themselves. According to Politifact, “Having a child can also help an undocumented parent qualify for relief from deportation, but only 4,000 unauthorized immigrants can receive such status per year, and the alien has to have been in the U.S. for at least 10 years.” This is not exactly an anchor. See Politifact’s full report on this issue.

A related question is this: If their U.S.-born children wouldn’t become automatic citizens, would illegal immigrants choose not to have children in America? Would revoking this American right under our current Constitution actually really change anything on the ground? Hospitals that now care for undocumented immigrant women would most certainly still do so, even if their babies were similarly illegal. Would states, which control their own schools, disallow non-citizens from attending? What would be the social consequences of having an entire generation of these children grow up in the U.S. without being educated? What if a child was born to an undocumented father and a U.S. citizen mother? What about an undocumented mother and a citizen father? How do you prove this? Will the federal government require paternity tests before granting citizenship? These are the kinds of questions that need to be asked and explored to have a real debate on birthright citizenship. And, centrally, if some undocumented immigrants are coming to the U.S. solely to have children, is it citizenship they’re after? Or are there economic – i.e. jobs for parents – motivating them, along with better living conditions and a host of other contrasts between life in Mexico, say, and life in the U.S.?

The next question is more political. Is kicking up dust about the 14th Amendment really about stemming the tide of illegal immigrants, as Lindsay Graham and Rep. John Boehner suggest? Or does it have more to do with what’s reflected in a CNN poll out today showing that 49% of Americans support revoking the automatic citizenship clause in the 14th Amendment?

Related Topics: anchor babies, illegal immigrant, Immigration, lindsay graham, pew, Uncategorized
  • Latest on Swampland

    Audacity of Dope: Tales of a Toking Teenage Obama

    We knew Barack Obama smoked weed in high school because he wrote about it in his books. What we didn’t know until Buzzfeed posted these choice nuggets (I’m so sorry) from David Maraniss’s new book on the President’s younger years, is the giggle-worthy details of his “Choom Gang” lifestyle, which are right out of a buddy stoner flick. Obama and his friends drove around the lush Hawaii countryside, hot-boxing their VW bus and re-upping with a long-haired pizza-tossing dealer named Ray, who Obama thanked in his yearbook “for all the good times.”

    Lewis Eisenberg, Major Romney Donor, Accuses Obama Of Demonizing Wall StreetHuffPost Politics

    Obama Stumbles? Why the President’s Right to Talk About Bain

    The meme of the day in journo-world is that President Obama has stumbled at the outset of the general election campaign. The evidence for this? Well, uh, there isn’t very much, really–except that a few Democrats have criticized his campaign’s attacks on Mitt Romney’s record at Bain Capital and that Obama’s fundraising is merely humongous, instead of obscenely humongous. The two phenomena are linked, of course: Obama isn’t getting the usual haul from Wall Street because he has outrageously–outrageously!–tried to regulate the bankers who did so much to crash the economy in 2008. The handful of Democrats squawking are people who either (a) get money from private equity firms or (b) have retired and joined Mondo Casino. But there is another side to this story:

  • m0mentom0ri

    Would Michelle Malkin be considered an ‘anchor baby’?
    .
    From wiki: “Malkin was born in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania as the first of two children to Philippine citizens Apolo DeCastro Maglalang, a physician in training, and Rafaela (née Perez), a homemaker and schoolteacher.[4][5] Her parents had arrived in the United States earlier that year on an employer-sponsored visa.[5][6]”
    .
    How many other conservative ‘anchor babies’ are there out there? Are their revisionist 14th amendment attitudes retroactive? Would they support the deportation of Michelle Malkin?
    .
    (And before the right-wingers go nuts and say I’m attacking Mrs Malkin because she’s Phillinpino, let me say now I could care less about where she’s from or how she got her citizenship. I’m just pointing out to the right-wingers that before they gather their pitchforks and torches, they may want to check their papers first)

  • shepherdwong

    “Or does it have more to do with what’s reflected in a CNN poll out today showing that 49% of Americans support revoking the automatic citizenship clause in the 14th Amendment?”
    .
    I bet you know the answer to that question (and won’t say) but that begs another question you’ll probably know the answer to. Does the fact that 49% of Americans support revoking the automatic citizenship clause in the 14th Amendment reflect the failure of mainstream news sources to name anti-Constitutional Republican race-baiting and crass political appeals to nativism for what they are? You betcha.

  • grape_crush

    Like I kinda said earlier; they can revoke the 14th as long as they make it retroactive back to when the Constitution was ratified.

    Otherwise it should be considered as yet another right-wing culture-war jab at the Latino population…made as a way to excite their ‘base’ in time for elections and to cover up for having the same, tired-yet-destructive policy positions.

    Why this is even being seriously discussed is beyond me…it’s so easy to take the journos for a ride…

  • kryptik1

    The absurd thing is that my family came under the exact same situations, coming here both for medical jobs as well as to get the hell out of the Marco regime. This is the exact situation I can think of, as I don’t believe me or any of my siblings were born before our parents were totally naturalized. Despite being in the country for nearly a decade before I was personally born, obviously to people wanting to stay here eventually as citizens themselves, would we not count as ‘citizens’, until we were sufficiently naturalized? Despite not living anywhere else?
    .
    Additionally, my issue is…even if the parents are illegal…why punish the child too? Tancredo wants to deny any and all public schooling to children of illegal immigrants. One, how would you end up figuring this out, and two, are we really going to amp up the cruelty to punish the child for the sins of the parents?
    .
    This is the perspective I come from: the realization that if these people got their way, none of our family would likely be citizens, until MAYBE the mid-90s, at earliest. Not to mention our whole line would probably never have the proper designation of ‘natural born citizen’, even generations down the line.

  • m0mentom0ri

    “Why this is even being seriously discussed is beyond me…it’s so easy to take the journos for a ride…”
    .
    Awesome point. Saying “it’s logistically incredibly difficult” is vastly understating the effort it would take to actually do this.
    .
    This is the new “flag burning amendment”.

  • http://erieangel.wordpress.com erieangel

    I’m curious if the same 49% of Americans who support revoking the 14th Amendment clause that guarantees birthright citizenship would have felt the same if the question had been put to them before the republicans started their campaign to do just that.
    .
    And why hasn’t the mainstream media reported that far more illegal aliens have been deported in the past 18 months than in the entire 8 years of Bush’s presidency? More importantly, why hasn’t it been reported that our government is now in the practice of splitting up families, deporting the illegal alien parent and shipping the children to foster care because they are US citizens? Or in the case of the US military nurse who had her child while visiting Germany–refusing citizenship to a child born of two US citizen parents but born in a foreign hospital. Yeah, thats really sweet.
    .
    No links, but my first complaint comes from BBC and the story of the nurse comes via word of mouth of a retired US Army Intelligence Officer who is a friend of the nurse.

  • m0mentom0ri

    Same here, kryptik. South Philly “wops”, when that was the term du jour for Italian illegals.

  • formerlyjames

    erieangel, I agree with the spirit of your post, but the nurse story is fishy. I don’t think that can happen based on the facts presented.

  • shepherdwong

    For that matter, why don’t they report that the US is in desperate need of young people entering the workforce and that the surest way to get an economic benefit from immigrants is to fully integrate them into society and supply them with a good education? Either they simply don’t know or they’ve decided there’s no profit in it.

  • acameronw

    If the 14th Amendment is repealed the amendment that replaces it should have a clause about tearing down the Statue of Liberty.

  • apr2563

    All of my grandparents immigrated to America pre-Ellis Island.
    .
    To the right wing fanatics: I don’t know their legality when they arrived here. I don’t know if they became citizens. Actually, one of my aunts was born on the boat taking them to America (talk about your “anchor baby”). I do know some of their children and grandchildren fought for this country. I know that they and the second and third generations worked hard and many went on to higher education.
    .
    Seems to me this is the story of millions who have come to this country. Now, can you tell me should I be worried? After all, if we do away with the 14th Amendment, I and other family members and my children maybe classified as illegal offspring of illegal grandparents.
    .
    Please do not send me back to Germany, France, The Czech Republic, or Moravia.

  • shepherdwong

    I apologize, Kate Pickert, this was an informative piece. Obviously, I am outraged by the sorry state of public opinion on a whole host of issues and, ergo, the mainstream press’ obvious failure to inform the public of the facts. But I shouldn’t take it all out on you, especially while you’re providing relevant facts.

  • perrywhite1

    This repeal business is just flat-out demagoguery, based on xenophobic hate-mongering. When Boehner says the America of his youth is going away, I agree — Republicans used to be decent, rational Americans in my youth. I grew up in a politically active Republican household, and I don’t remember this much hate. I want my country back!

  • http://erieangel.wordpress.com erieangel

    Yeah, I know what you mean. When my son’s friend (he’s the former Army officer) related this story, I thought the same. I guess I’m looking for anybody who may have something on this or whatever. I have been unable to find the time to do an extensive internet search into this.

  • formerlyjames

    apr, good point. There’s a lot of murky waters relating to the citizenship of many native born. My great grandfather never bothered with citizenship in 60 years after immigrating. When he was about 80 he was tracked down and threatened with deportation if he didn’t apply for citizenship. I have his paper with his photo and he does not look happy in it. An interesting element is that it lists his foreign citizenship as “British”, whereas he had departed Cork which in the interim since his departure had long ago gained independence from Britain.

  • apr2563

    perry: I was explaining to my son why I thought the time now is so different now from the 50s and early 60s when there was so much hate speech. Between HUAC and the Birchers accusing everyone who wasn’t right of Genghis Kahn of being commies, there was a buffer.
    .
    The Republicans still had people of honor and common sense representing them. Eisenhower, Percy, Javits, Brooks, Rockefeller, etc. would never survive this era. They would be destroyed by hate radio, Fox News, and people of their own party.
    I don’t think even Goldwater would be acceptable to them.

  • apr2563

    formerlyjames: Thanks for sharing your history. That is what is so funny. After 2 World Wars, it would be hard to deport anyone of European ancestry back to the exact country of their origin.
    American industry was so intent on importing cheap labor they were not too concerned about legality issues.

  • bobcn1

    ‘Would they support the deportation of Michelle Malkin?’
    .
    The chance to deport Malkin is almost attractive enough to get me to support the calling of a constitutional convention. :-)
    .
    I’ve considered the current rant against the 14th Amendment merely the latest pre-election political sideshow (now that gays, guns, God, and commies seem to have run out of steam). We’ll get another couple months of passionate and frequently hyperbolic rhetoric, followed by no change at all — at least until the next campaign begins and the rhetoric starts up all over again. Unfortunately, the electorate will once again be distracted by politicians who wish to avoid giving real answers to real problems.

  • mcy75

    It makes little sense to compare the current immigration situation to pre-Ellis Island days. Where there immigration limits then? Was there even the notion of illegal immigration? What special rights/services did being a citizen bestow upon somebody? Did people even check to see if you were anything more than male when voting? The question before us is should a child that parents have entered the country illegally be confered the rights of citizenship, not how this question was handeled in 1850. I do believe in the 14th admendment for a number of reason, but I do not think there is anything wrong with seeking answers to the questions outlined above, along with seeking a clear picture of how undocumented workers hurt or help local and State budgets and economies. How can we seek with in the confines of the 14th admendment to fix the problems caused (indeed if there are any) if we do not understand the problem?

  • gysgt213

    “Why this is even being seriously discussed is beyond me…it’s so easy to take the journos for a ride…”
    .
    Grape-I think the main reasons why this is being seriously discussed are because we are in tough times. A semi-wise man once said:

    “You go into some of these small towns in Pennsylvania, and like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing’s replaced them,” Obama said. “And they fell through the Clinton Administration, and the Bush Administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are gonna regenerate and they have not. And it’s not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.”
    .
    That semi-wise man eventually became our current president, but of course at the time he said this he was deemed out of touch about real Americans.

  • bobcn1

    ‘And why hasn’t the mainstream media reported that far more illegal aliens have been deported in the past 18 months than in the entire 8 years of Bush’s presidency?’
    .
    You already know why. It would interfere the narrative the corporate and right-wing media is pushing.
    .
    ‘Or in the case of the US military nurse who had her child while visiting Germany–refusing citizenship to a child born of two US citizen parents but born in a foreign hospital.’
    .
    I’d be very surprised if this were true. We just had a presidential candidate (McCain) who was born in Panama (of military parents). Only crackpots questioned the validity of his citizenship.

  • abbydelabbey

    Having lived on the Texas-Mexico border; yes, people come to America illegally and have children in the US. If you saw the living conditions and the lack of opportunity for advancement and you would understand why people want better lives for their families.

    If you look across the Rio Grande River and see beautiful homes and a nation not ravaged by drug cartels, wouldn’t you want to cross the border? Wouldn’t you want your children born in America to have a better future?

    And to do so would you be willing (along with your children) to pick lettuce, tomatoes, etc. in 100+ heat without bathroom facilities and potable water? Clean homes and offices for low wages? Build homes for low wages? All the while knowing that your “employer” could underpay you or not pay you at all for your services because they know you won’t complain?

    Would you?

    And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all they strength: this is the first commandment. And the second is like, namely this, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. There is none other commandment greater than these. Mark 12:30-31

  • http://lookinfromoutside.wordpress.com lookinfromoutside

    I would not be surprised if she actually picked up her skirts and walked out.

  • http://miermj.wordpress.com miermj

    “The Pew Hispanic Center, which conducts stellar research on everything from health care to religion, released a report today quantifying just how many children are born in the U.S. to illegal immigrants. The report comes in the midst of a campaign by some Republicans to hold congressional hearings on whether children born to illegal immigrants should automatically become citizens. According to the Pew report, 340,000 babies were born in the U.S. in 2008 to at least one undocumented parent. And of all the children of undocumented immigrants in the U.S., about 80% were born here – the rest were born abroad.”

    From wiki: “Malkin was born in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania as the first of two children to Philippine citizens Apolo DeCastro Maglalang, a physician in training, and Rafaela (née Perez), a homemaker and schoolteacher.[4][5] Her parents had arrived in the United States earlier that year on an employer-sponsored visa.[5][6]”

    So, if the parents are here legally, how can their child be illegal? A common problem is people having as issue saying the word “illegal”. If you come to this country to live/study (or any other country that i’m aware of) without the proper paper work, it’s illegal. Malkin’s parents were here legally. So she clearly couldn’t be an “anchor baby”, correct?

  • http://lookinfromoutside.wordpress.com lookinfromoutside

    What about the people who lived in Arizona before it was sold to the US by Mexico and had the border jump over their heads. Are their descendants going to be stripped of citizenship?
    .
    As Apr2563 said, how far back is far enough? And fair enough?

  • http://WorldChronicle.net surazeus

    I have more than 100 ancestors who sailed from war-ravaged Europe and just walked off the boat into America between 1630 and 1840 and built better lives. I see everyone who lives on Wohali (Eagle in Cherokee and my name for North America) as my fellow human beings who deserve rewards for hard work to build better lives for their children.

  • http://WorldChronicle.net surazeus

    We are all fellow Wohalians, sharing this continent from Alaska to Mexico.

  • bobcn1

    ‘If you come to this country to live/study (or any other country that i’m aware of) without the proper paper work, it’s illegal. Malkin’s parents were here legally. So she clearly couldn’t be an “anchor baby”, correct?’
    .
    If the criteria for citizenship was no longer whether a person was born in the US, then it wouldn’t matter if Malkin’s parents were ‘illegal’ or not. It wouldn’t matter whether she were an ‘anchor baby’ or not. Malkin wouldn’t be an American — she’d be a Filipino.
    .
    In the unlikely event that the 14th were to be changed, I doubt that the change would retroactively strip people of citizenship. However, for Malkin I’d be willing to make an exception.

  • kevin

    Like I kinda said earlier; they can revoke the 14th as long as they make it retroactive back to when the Constitution was ratified.
    .
    The irony is that the 14th also had lots to say about letting Confederates who’d committed treason against the United States regain their citizenship.
    .
    I wonder how Lindsey Graham would feel if we started debating whether or not his great grandfather should’ve been denied citizenship — and thus Lindsey too?

  • bobcn1

    For those of you who think that changing the 14th is a good idea here’s a question for you: Can you prove that your parents and grandparents are citizens or legal immigrants? You may believe it — but can you prove it?

    In my case I’ve been told that my grandparents were immigrants. Can I prove that they were legal immigrants? No. Can I even prove that my parents (now passed away) were citizens? No, I can’t. I don’t have any documents that prove it.

    I suspect that this would be the case for a lot of people (if not most). I have a birth certificate, but if that wasn’t good enough to prove citizenship, I don’t know what I’d do. It would be my word against anyone who wanted to dispute it.

  • gysgt213

    The entire premise of this is wrong. People are not coming here to have their babies born as Americans. They are coming here because the situation in their own countries is so bad they are trying to survive.
    .
    America get over yourself.

  • jimenez013

    Although I agree that children should not be punished for their parents being illegal immigrants, there is an underlying issue that must be addressed. Many illegal immigrants come here to live and they do not pay taxes, they make up bogus employment and income and get food stamps and medical for their ¨8¨ US Citizen children. By the way, there is no way to prove that they are over income for these programs! Another thing is if you cant get a job legally is it ok to have 8 kids and be able live off of the government money because you have 8 kids? No one should have multiple children if they cant afford it! Its understood that people come here because of poor conditions in their own country but our country is at a deficit as it is, our unemployment rate *of honest working citizens here legally, is rising. Is it our obligation to save all other citizens of foreign nations? There are many obvious issues with illegal immigration, the question is: how can we penalize illegal immigrant without penalizing their natural born US citizen children? Is it our obligation to help people how have children here who came in illegally, technically many of them dont even ¨exist¨ and there will never be an accurate number of illegal aliens in the US!

  • jimenez013

    I agree 100% There are so many sides to this issue but it doesnt change the fact that this issue exists and it affects all of us who are here legally in one way or another, whether people care or whether they fail to see this is another issue.

  • herby002

    “Would revoking this American right under our current Constitution actually really change anything on the ground? Hospitals that now care for undocumented immigrant women would most certainly still do so, even if their babies were similarly illegal. Would states, which control their own schools, disallow non-citizens from attending?”

    California voters voted to do just that a few years ago:
    Made it illegal for “undocumented” children to get free or state-paid medical care, any kind of “welfare” support, or admission to public schools.

    The courts stayed implementation of the measure, pending a decision of the CA Supreme Court – which ruled it invalid, and struck it down as unfair & unequal under the State Constitution,

    Most of the state’s medical providers and school districts opposed the “law”, and welcomed the final ruling.

  • wylied
  • allthingsinaname

    “Or does it have more to do with what’s reflected in a CNN poll out today showing that 49% of Americans support revoking the automatic citizenship clause in the 14th Amendment?”
    .
    It takes 2/3rds of the States to ratify a change .49% of the population is going to do it.
    .
    The thing I hate about politicians is how they will inflame an issue for their own gain. These people do not deserve the positions they hold. I am disgusted with them and the people who support them.

  • afraidofheights

    Lindsey Graham and the Republicans are seeking to repeal and replace the 14th Amendment.

    According to House Minority Leader, John Boehner, they want to replace it with a 28th Amendment that is twice as strong. They claim that the Democrats slipped the 14th Amendment through as part of the $15,000 Buggy Bailout Bill of 1866 therefore it should not be valid anyhow.

    Read this article. VERY FUNNY.

    http://www.dailygoat.com/?p=2508

  • terryheidel

    My take: we can feel sorry for Mexicans for being born in a vastly corrupt country with rampant poverty and little economic future, and we can feel sorry for the millions (billions?) in other countries of the world born in similar or worse conditions than are the Mexicans, but in NONE of these cases should we feel obligated to give any of these people (or their children) U.S. citizenship.

    There are things we can use to try to help them: foreign aid, political diplomacy, private charity and private voluntary assistance. These aids are not magic and will not keep all Mexicans or all other nationalities from seeking to come to the U.S. to have children, and thus to seek to gain from the rights and benefits of U.S. citizenship, without really buying into the things the U.S. stands for, including respect for the law.

    We should NOT feel obligated to help any of these people by granting them (or their children) U.S. citizenship that is not earned by going through the legal process of naturalization.

    Here is an example of abuse of the 14th amendment:

    Chinese consultants sell US ‘birth tourism’ to expectant mothers

    http://arabnews.com/world/article86859.ece

    I rarely agree with the crazed hypocritical Republicans on any issue, and they might not be bringing up this issue sincerely and in good faith, but the issue stands as one in dire need of fixing, nonetheless. If it takes a constitutional amendment, let’s get on with it!

  • http://heloise8.wordpress.com/ heloise8

    Statistics lie more than journalists. I don’t believe these numbers for a second.

    Just take a walk through Wal Mart. I see Mexican women who have aged beyond their years with no less than 4-5 kids all under the ages of 10. I know, I count them. I believe my eyes before I believe the low numbers (yet sig #) of this study.

    Citizenship? Hell no, they are not coming here for that. They are coming here for the freebies that go with coming here in the first place. We value citizenship, they don’t. And only Americans seem to get this.

    I have been calling for looking at the 14th amendment for years. Finally somebody heard it. And I am not alone.

    Heloise

  • kryptik1

    Just a wee question there: You say “Mexican women” with kids that you see in Wal Mart. Just a small quibble with that: how do you know that they aren’t citizens already? Why does, through the context of your post, the assumption run that they MUST be illegal Mexican immigrants wanting freebies? And even then, the plural of ‘anecdote’ is not ‘data’. Stats can be manipulated, but so can anecdotes, and emotional manipulation in these cases tends to be a lot more pernicious. Oh…and I say this as a Filipino-American who ‘gets it’, entirely more than those who think shucking the 14th is an absolute necessity to avoid letting ‘THEM’ in.

  • http://golinus.wordpress.com golinus

    Wouldn’t it be nice if for once Fox News corrected the misinformation provided to its viewers by Lindsay Graham’s comments? No way they’d correct that. Their goal is to misinform, and to twist the truth. Can’t believe so many people naively watch that cable news and go out and spread the misinformation. The main oroblem with republicans and tea parties is their desire for “ethnic cleansing” of hispanics in this country.

  • allthingsinaname

    “According to the Pew report, 340,000 babies were born in the U.S. in 2008 to at least one undocumented parent”
    .
    So how many have one parent here legally, or perhaps a US citizen?
    .
    What these nut cases are asking is that when a person is born in the US at least one parent will have to register as a US citizen. have papers, etc. then that documentation will have follow that child for the rest if his life, and then to his children, etc..
    .
    But what the heck the just want the government out of their lives.

  • aportagee

    The idea that the 14th Amendment needs to be changed is wrong. The original intent of the amendment was not to confer citizenship to children born here whose parents were not citizens. Period.
    Somehow, we’ve distorted the meaning of the phrase “subject to the jurisdiction” from the very clear original intent.
    All you need to do is read the words of the actual author of the citizenship clause Senator Howard of Michigan, during debates on the amendment, to understand how that phrase was intended to be interpreted.
    Here’s a portion of one of his speeches:

    “This will not of course include persons in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors….”

    There can be no misinterpretation of his words, but somehow there has been. His intent has been warped through time and we now have a situation where millions of children are receiving citizenship when they shouldn’t.

    The only thing that’s needed is some clarification. Not change.

  • mtracer

    I want to thank you for an informative and entertaining article. I have used this as background information on my own blog post and offered attribution. You can view it at http://www.madisontracer.com Thank you!

blog comments powered by Disqus