"Anchor Babies" AKA Citizens of the United States of America

[malasadas.livejournal.com]

America's already charged debate on immigration and illegal immigration has taken a harsh turn recently, and no, I don't mean the contentious Arizona immigration law and legal challenges to it. This time, and I believe for the first time in my life, leaders on Congress are seriously suggesting changing the provisions in the Constitution that guarantee citizenship to ANY person born within the United States of America. Representative Lamar Smith, the senior Republican on the House Judiciary Committee, has 90 co-signers on a bill to deny birthright citizenship. Senator John Kyl, the Minority Whip, and Senator Lindsey Graham where recently joined by Senator John McCain in calling for hearings to change the 14th Amendment to the Constitution to change the current birthright citizenship granted by the Amendment.

They are joined by organizations like the Federation for American Immigration Reform whose statement on the issue insists upon using the term "anchor baby" to describe people born in this country to illegal immigrants -- despite the fact that those babies are, indeed, no less citizens than any of the people on Capital Hill or elsewhere calling for them to be denied that citizenship. Representative Ron Paul has floated an idea since 2007 that would retool the 14th Amendment to deny citizenship to children whose parents are not citizens and do not owe "permanent allegience" to the U.S. -- potentially making my grandparents, whose parents were not legal immigrants but not citizens, not eligible for birthright citizenship. To be fair, I doubt that proposal will go anywhere as it has been sitting on Rep. Paul's desk for 3 years now.

All of this despite the fact that so-called "anchor babies" cannot even sponsor a parent for a green card until they are 21 -- that's quite a long term plan, there. Cross the border, have a baby and then wait two decades to get in line for a green card.

What makes me personally angry here is that I think birthright citizenship is actually one of the truly great features of American democracy. In this country, unlike many of our peer democracies in the West, we do not make any requirement of citizenship except to be born here. Any generation of people from anywhere in the world can be Americans, and we have not visited the sins of the parents upon the children who wish to claim that citizenship. I believe that this is one very real reason why second generation children in this country integrate with high levels of success. It's something that is of genuine pride in my country.

To start meddling with that over a supposed "problem" of the children of illegal immigrants is atrocious. To use a slur like "anchor baby" to describe a person who is no less a citizen by the laws of the land than the most well connected member of the D.A.R. is unconscionable. And the issue is obviously being over enflamed because so-called "anchor babies" cannot even have their parents apply for an IR-5 visa until they are 21 years old.

Now it is true that some border states and communities are under significant duress because of attendent problems with illegal immigration. But when the labor provided by such immigrants is highly desired within our borders, it is pure folly to suggest that altering the requirements for Unites States citizenship is going to make even a symbolic gesture towards solving them. Leave birthright citizenship alone.

Comments

[pastorlenny.livejournal.com]

How the hell do you propose we keep our country white, then, Mr. Smartypants?

[spaz-own-joo.livejournal.com]

Use inheritance and cultural norms (we can use those instead of laws since they're constitutionally protected) to keep the nice parts of the country white.

I know!

[futurebird.livejournal.com]

Has anyone thought of using paint?

[the-rukh.livejournal.com]

Broad and sweeping redefinitions. Aberacadabera.

[readherring.livejournal.com]

Through the miracle of genetic manipulation. Although everything is still in the test phase, we've been secretly tampering with the water supply in Vermont for decades, and the results have been very encouraging!

[terminator44.livejournal.com]

By getting rid of those damn Irish!

[mlledesade]

I was listening to a report about this on NPR and it was pissing me off. I had to switch stations. :/ They'd better not lay a finger on that amendment.

[rogerdr.livejournal.com]

Don't worry, the SCOTUS would force them to write a whole new Amendment, which would die a very quick death.

[mijan.livejournal.com]

If the parents hadn't entered the USA illegally, then there wouldn't be the term "anchor babies" to begin with.

Additionally, the issue with anchor babies is not an anti-Hispanic thing. The concept is used, INTENTIONALLY, by a lot of women from Asian countries. They will SPECIFICALLY plan vacations to the USA close to their due dates, in order to have "American" babies. How is that not abuse of the system?!?

My grandparents were immigrants. They came here legally. Green cards. Spoke English, despite it NOT being their first language. They paid taxes. Gave birth to my mother, who was born with dual citizenship. They applied for American citizenship. Gained citizenship. Voted. Contributed to the community.

They immigrated legally BEFORE giving birth to my mom.

If you can't see the difference between that, and people either sneaking across the border OR planning a vacation to the United States JUST to have an "American" baby in an attempt to "jump the line" for citizenship, then you're out of touch with reality.

And to note, in almost ALL other aspects of immigration reform (and politics in general), people consider me a liberal. This is, however, one specific issue that people need to recognize for what it is. I feel bad for the babies being born as tools for their parents... like the ropes in a tug-of-war.

[merig00.livejournal.com]

We still get those questions in the russian-american comms on LJ: how to get a visa for a pregnant couple and give birth here for free.

[underlankers.livejournal.com]

>.<

I'll let my icon give my experience of talking to idiots like these chuckleheads. Amazing how the Right Wing always loves big government when it's beating up on minorities.

You know better....

[geezer-also.livejournal.com]

I'm sure you know much better than I the reasons for the 14th originally. You probably can tell me exactly when it started applying to "anchor babies".
And since this has been a topic of debate that I can remember at least back to the 60s, your last sentence feels disingenuous, just an opportunity to take a poke at the right wing......which thinking about it, there is nothing wrong with doing; except you should stop being so predictable, and I should stop taking offense :D

[fizzyland.livejournal.com]

Ever since players discovered the "Anchor Baby" exploit to the Immigration Game, developers have been working to patch it. I don't really see the objection to ending cheating.

[faylnncortez.livejournal.com]

Your point aside. I f*ing LOVE the way you phrased that! LOL

[reflaxion.livejournal.com]

Leave the citizenship by birth alone. Let the kid stay - deport the parents. Put the kid up for adoption. Then we'll see how common it is.

[gunslnger.livejournal.com]

Since my wife mentioned this a few days ago in response to this topic on CNN, I'll just say that you're a genius. :)

[mijopo.livejournal.com]

unlike many of our peer democracies in the West, we do not make any requirement of citizenship except to be born here.

I'm not sure in what respects the US differs, but I don't really get the point. The US also grants citizenship to lots of people not born in the US, so the US doesn't in fact make being born here a requirement of citizenship.

I completely agree that it's ignorant to deride some citizens as "anchor babies".

However, I disagree with your claim that altering this wouldn't go some distance towards addressing the illegal immigration problem. Having a child in the US is a big motivator, not necessarily for the parents dream of citizenship but for the parents dreaming of ensuring a better life for their children.

Personally, I think the US immigration policy is a mess and I call bullshit on all those claim to advocate free trade but oppose free movement of labor. But, that said, you'll need to say more to convince me that there's something sancrosanct in the notion that being born in the US should and must obviously confer citizenship on a person. If person X was born in the US and left one month later and person Y was born elsewhere, but moved to the US two days after his/her birth and lived there for the next 10 years, to my mind, person Y has a much more "natural" claim to citizenship than person X.

[mrbogey.livejournal.com]

'All of this despite the fact that so-called "anchor babies" cannot even sponsor a parent for a green card until they are 21 -- that's quite a long term plan, there. Cross the border, have a baby and then wait two decades to get in line for a green card.'

"Hey, I got an idea! I'll take what commonly happens and I'll say it with a snarky tone so as to invite ridicule on it. It's sure to work!"

Illegals don't care about a green card in as much as thy care about staying here. Having a kid here makes that a lot easier.

'What makes me personally angry here is that I think birthright citizenship is actually one of the truly great features of American democracy.'

How?

'Any generation of people from anywhere in the world can be Americans, and we have not visited the sins of the parents upon the children who wish to claim that citizenship.'

Yea, we save that for the native-born Americans who are descended from racist slaveowners who must be punished for it.

[fizzyland.livejournal.com]

Yea, we save that for the native-born Americans who are descended from racist slaveowners who must be punished for it.

The upside is that we all get together on Thursdays to enjoy fine cigars and single-malt whiskey, so it's not all bad being the White Oppressor.

[debergerac.livejournal.com]

citizenship aside, aren't anchor babies immediately eligible for the panoply of social services?

[geezer-also.livejournal.com]

Yes!!!

[policraticus.livejournal.com]

I think your incoherent rage is also irrational and based mostly on emotional response to the fact that, omgz!thinkofthechildren and omgz!itsthefourteenthamendmentdredscottdredscottdredscottomgz.

Offering full citizenship to people due to an accident of birth is an exceedingly generous national policy for a country that already has some of the world's most generous immigration laws. Suggesting we amend the amendment is worthy of consideration. Although, I agree it does less than nothing to with stemming illegal immigration.

[mijopo.livejournal.com]

Although, I agree it does less than nothing to with stemming illegal immigration.

It would increase illegal immigration? How do you figure?

[gunslnger.livejournal.com]

I'm not aware of the discussion going on that you reference, but AFAIK the problem is a regular law and not the Constitution. All that should need to be done is change that law (I don't recall the exact statute right now) so that either a)one of the parents is a citizen or b)that both parents are here as legal immigrants (not a work or visitation visa).

All of this despite the fact that so-called "anchor babies" cannot even sponsor a parent for a green card until they are 21 -- that's quite a long term plan, there. Cross the border, have a baby and then wait two decades to get in line for a green card.

One, you're minimizing the fact that people do plan that far in advance (and plan to stay here illegally until it can be done) and two, you're ignoring the fact that the immigrants don't necessarily know that.

[lucazzo.livejournal.com]

This.

No need to change the constitution, just change immigration law.

I might add that Italy used to have a similar problem with "anchor babies", and I find the current regulation exemplary:

1) Child born in Italy from an Italian citizen and foreign spouse: citizen.
2) Child born in Italy from two foreigners (legal or otherwise): permanent resident.
2.a) The child can apply for citizenship when he/she turns 18.

(I don't know afterwards what the rules concerning the parents would be).

[readherring.livejournal.com]

Good point. This isn't the first time house members have supported measures that they know haven't got a prayer to get passed, because they hope the public will credit them for trying.

[http://users.livejournal.com/-wanderer-/]

Seeing as how it is possible for people to live illegally in the United States for decades, the end result of repealing the 14th Amendment would be that the children of these people could conceivably be born in the US, raised here, attend US public schools and eventually be deported to a country they've never known (since there is no real way right now for illegal immigrants to apply for residency while in the US). The injustice this visits on those people seems to outweigh whatever benefits we get from denying citizenship to "anchor-babies."

See this for a similar story: http://www.givemescholarships.com/2010/07/22/illegal-immigrant-college/

[reality-hammer.livejournal.com]

Boo hoo, I can't get free money! It's hilarious that the problem is not "can't get into college" but rather "I can't get free money that's only supposed to be available to legal citizens". Baaaaawwwww!!!!

Hey, tell it to your criminally irresponsible parents. You can still get into college, you're just going to have to pay your own way for once.

Next up: career shoplifters demand frequent buyer benefits!

[readherring.livejournal.com]

The funny thing about this is that the most vehement "This is America, Gaddammit!" types are only first or 2nd generation Americans themselves. Like Joe Vento (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,198757,00.html) of This Is AMERICA: WHEN ORDERING 'SPEAK ENGLISH' fame. A co-worker of mine who called Arizona a 'state under siege' has a mother at home who, in her 50 years of living in America, never bothered to learn English.

...aaaand I'm stealing your "Incoherent Rage" macro.

[reality-hammer.livejournal.com]

"Only"?

Do citizens who can trace their lineage further back have more rights?

Since I disagree I'll call it rage and ridicule anyone who supports it

[reality-hammer.livejournal.com]

[dreadfulpenny81.livejournal.com]

But when the labor provided by such immigrants is highly desired within our borders, it is pure folly to suggest that altering the requirements for Unites States citizenship is going to make even a symbolic gesture towards solving them. Leave birthright citizenship alone.

And the reason for that is because farmers are paying for cheaper labor. Companies should be held accountable, but so should the people coming into our country ILLEGALLY. They're breaking the law as are the companies hiring them. Put a stop to the companies hiring non-legal workers and this country will see the number of illegal immigrants dwindle. Put a stop to granting citizenship to babies born here from illegal resident parents and you end illegal immigration all together.

I'm not in favor of repealing the 14th amendment, but I agree that it should be reconsidered and if we have to draft another amendment to the Constitution to stop "anchor babies", then so be it.

Ignoring your well-tainting hysterics...

[reality-hammer.livejournal.com]

Amending the Constitution to state that people in the country illegally do not get automatic citizenship for their babies is both prudent and reasonable.

Similarly, people here on temporary visas should not have automatic citizenship conferred to their babies.

The "resident alien" status is a nice compromise. You have to have been in the country at least 31 days in the current calendar year plus at least 183 days in the previous three year time span. While it's still possible to get pregnant and then decide to come here it's hard to do that legally within that time frame.

No, this is well-tainting hysteria.....

[underlankers.livejournal.com]

Indeed. There was no need to redress this by giving citizenship to Sambo in the 1860s. That was the ruin of the white race.

anchor babies is not a new idea

[caerfrli.livejournal.com]

Hold Back the Dawn, a great movie has scene where Europeans fleeing fascism live in Mexico and one crosses the boarder in time to give birth. The concept was apparently well known in the 40s.

Re: anchor babies is not a new idea

[reality-hammer.livejournal.com]

I think a distinction can be made between people claiming refugee status and people who have no intention of residing here. Indeed, the original proponents of the amendment said just that with their "subject to" language.

Anyone not making themselves subject to US laws isn't a citizen, as per the original intent of the amendment. Indians not subject to US taxes, for example, were not granted citizenship until a 1924 law.