Birthright is Political tool now also

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Thu Dec 08, 2005 5:00 pm

Birthright Citizenship Growing Issue in Illegal Immigration Debate

San Jose Mercury News

Jim Puzzanghera December 8, 2005

It's been a cornerstone of U.S. law since shortly after the Civil War: Children born in the United States become citizens, even if their parents are here illegally.

Now some conservatives are taking aim at that birthright.

They call the U.S.-born children of illegal immigrants "anchor babies" because at age 18 the children can apply to bring other family members here from abroad, and a growing group of House Republicans wants to change the policy. They hope to add a provision to the immigration bill that the House of Representatives will consider next week that would deny citizenship to those children.

Because of widespread opposition in the House and even more in the Senate, the measure, even with 77 sponsors, is unlikely to become law, and would face a constitutional challenge in court if it did.

But it is the latest in a series of get-tough immigration measures put forth in recent weeks by GOP members of Congress. The proposals -- ranging from a fence stretching the length of the border with Mexico to stiff sanctions for employers who hire illegal immigrants -- almost ensure that illegal immigration will be a central and divisive issue in next year's midterm elections.

The conservative wing of the Republican Party has been pushing hardest for the measures, which go much further than President Bush's plan to strengthen existing border security and establish a guest-worker program.

Those advocates see political support for their stance. A national poll last month by the non-partisan Rasmussen Reports found that 49 percent favored denying citizenship to U.S.-born children of illegal immigrants, with 41 percent opposing such a proposal.

Supporters note that few countries -- none in Europe -- offer birthright citizenship.

But Tamar Jacoby, a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute, a conservative think tank, said that's why other countries have not been as successful at integrating immigrants. The birthright proposal is the worst of the immigration proposals floating around Washington and could be "suicide" for Republicans, she said.

"To change the way we establish citizenship is such an extreme measure, and it makes you really question what is motivating people to come up with those ideas," said Rep. Charlie Gonzalez, D-Texas, whose grandparents emigrated from Mexico. "It just goes counter to what we are as a people, and I think it does great harm."

According to the Constitution's 14th Amendment, ratified in 1868 to give former slaves U.S. citizenship, "all persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States."

Rep. Tom Tancredo, R-Colo., a leading opponent of illegal immigration, said citizens of other countries are not subject to U.S. jurisdiction, and he added that drafters of the 14th Amendment did not intend it to apply to children of illegal immigrants.

But in a case in 1898, the Supreme Court ruled that a Chinese immigrant born in San Francisco was legally a U.S. citizen, even though federal law at the time denied citizenship to people from China. The court said birth in the United States constituted "a sufficient and complete right to citizenship."

Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-San Jose, who serves on the House immigration subcommittee, said it would take a constitutional amendment to deny birthright citizenship.

"You can only assume they are offering this for political reasons and not a legal reason," she said.

Michele Waslin, director of immigration policy research at the National Council of La Raza, a leading Latino organization, said people are coming to the United States illegally for jobs, not to have children who must wait until they're 18 to petition to bring in other family members.

"I think it's unfortunate that some Republicans are trying to use innocent babies to score political points," she said.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Unless somebody can convince me otherwise, the only change to US citizenship as a birthright is to change it to citizenship upon conception. Meaning, if it can be reasonably determined that a child was conceived in the US, he/she is granted citizenship.

Azrayel · Post by **Azrayel** » Mon Dec 19, 2005 4:56 pm

o.k call me ignorant, but even if a child is a citizen while the parents are immigrants, who is going to take care of the child when the parents go back to there original country? The problems with his law are giving me a headache and unless they are slaves as the constitution states, they should not be US citizens just because they were born here.

Azrayel · Post by **Azrayel** » Mon Dec 19, 2005 5:04 pm

nope they are still immigrants.

Azrayel · Post by **Azrayel** » Mon Dec 19, 2005 5:21 pm

until you went through the process of becoming a citizen or if your parents did b/4 they had you than yes thats what I'm saying.

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Mon Dec 19, 2005 7:01 pm

Azrayel wrote: o.k call me ignorant, but even if a child is a citizen while the parents are immigrants, who is going to take care of the child when the parents go back to there original country? The problems with his law are giving me a headache and unless they are slaves as the constitution states, they should not be US citizens just because they were born here.The way I understand it, the way the law is now, the parents claim a right to stay because their baby is a citizen. Pretty good incentive to make a dangerous journey across the border at 8 1/2 months pregnant, isn't it?

chonsigirl · Post by **chonsigirl** » Mon Dec 19, 2005 7:05 pm

Well, I have known of cases when the child was born in the United States, and the parents were illegal immigrants. When the parents are deported, the child is made to go with them. I had several students that had this happen to them.

Lulu2 · Post by **Lulu2** » Sat Aug 05, 2006 12:59 pm

ACCOUNTABLE (wisely) said: " Pretty good incentive to make a dangerous journey across the border at 8 1/2 months pregnant, isn't it?"

+++++++++ Yes, and unfortunately, it's happening more and more frequently!

Since this thread is fairly old, I wondered what people are thinking about it today?

Personally, I doubt that the framers of our constitution ever considered the implications of millions upon millions of illegal immigrants and what this little clause might do to enable that illegality.

I think anyone born here TO LEGAL CITIZENS deserves citizenship. Otherwise, the child will "suffer" due to the activity of its parents.

Adam Zapple · Post by **Adam Zapple** » Sat Aug 05, 2006 3:55 pm

If they are here illegally the child should not citizenship rights. If they are abiding by immigration laws and regulation then the child should be granted citizenship. Simple as that imho.

Lulu2 · Post by **Lulu2** » Sat Aug 05, 2006 6:55 pm

AGREED! Adam, doesn't that just make your teeth itch? :wah:

Adam Zapple · Post by **Adam Zapple** » Sat Aug 05, 2006 7:04 pm

It makes me tingle! :wah: I love it when we find common ground. :-6

Lulu2 · Post by **Lulu2** » Sat Aug 05, 2006 7:07 pm

Fiddle! We've got more common ground than not, I suspect! It's just the "prickly" things that we discuss.

"Mom, apple pie, puppies, kittens, zydeco, Cajun, grits, sunsets and little naked kids playing in mud" are fun, but boring topics of conversation......