Thread: Congress Mulls Bill to Revise Birthright Citizenship

Congress Mulls Bill to Revise Birthright Citizenship
Possible Change to 14th Amendment Could Add Fuel to the Immigration Debate

87 comments and Post Your Own


By MATT ROCHELEAU
June 13, 2010
Anyone born on American soil is an American.

That's an unconditional right, according to the 14th Amendment of the US Constitution.

A bill in the House of Representatives would change the 14th amendment to the US Constitution that grants anyone who is born on US soil the right of American citizenship.
(Eric Meola/Getty Images)It's not an exclusively American practice. Worldwide, about 30 nations (mostly in the Western Hemisphere) have similar birthright citizenship policy. Citizenship based on where a person is born, is called jus soli, which is Latin for "right of the soil."

But jus soli is primarily a New World right. Today, there are no European nations that grant jus soli. Most countries in Europe use a jus sanguinis policy, which determines citizenship based on having an ancestor who is a citizen.

A bill making its way through Congress, if passed, would bring the US more into line with current European birthright policies. But in the wake of the controversy over Arizona's new immigration policy, any changes to the 14th Amendment would likely become another flashpoint in the debate over illegal immigrants.

"Many countries do not grant birthright citizenship because they have older histories and see themselves as individual nations with individual identities," explains John Skrentny, Director of the Center for Comparative Immigration Studies and sociology professor at the University of California at San Diego. "Whereas the United States, like many other countries in the Western Hemisphere, began as, and has always seen itself as, a melting pot," he says.

In recent years, other nations, even if they seem themselves as open to legal immigrants, have taken steps limit the size of any demographic boost based on births to foreigners.

In 1983, for example, England amended its jus soli policy so that children born in the United Kingdom were only granted citizenship if one of their parents was either a citizen or could prove some sort of permanent residency in the country.

And India moved away from granting birthright citizenship in late 2004 to only allowing those born in the country to gain citizenship if both parents are citizens or if one parent is a citizen of India and the other is not an illegal immigrant.

In the US, those opposed to this form of granting citizenship would like to revise the 14th Amendment, which says, in part:

"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 ..."

The14th Amendment was passed after the Civil War with the intent of clarifying that former slaves were citizens and entitled to Constitutional rights. Since then, the Supreme Court has consistently upheld that birthright of children born to foreigners in the US, including a 1898 challenge concerning children of non-citizen Chinese immigrants.

How many children of illegal immigrants are born in the US each year?

No one really knows.

But in April, the Pew Hispanic Center, a Washington-based, nonpartisan organization, released a report that estimated the number of children of illegal immigrants, who received citizenship by birth on U.S. soil, has risen by nearly 50 percent from 2.7 million in 2003 to 4 million in 2008. One-third of those children live in poverty, which is nearly double the poverty rate for children of US-born parents.

According to the "Birthright Citizenship Act" bill, which has 91 cosponsors, the proposed changes would affect the Fourteenth Amendment and only grant citizenship "if the person is born in the United States of parents, one of whom is:"

- a citizen or national of the United States; - an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence in the United States whose residence is in the United States; or - an alien performing active service in the armed forces (as defined in section 101 of title 10, United States Code)."

But getting such changes through both houses of Congress is a long shot.

"I'd be surprised," if the bill passes, says Tamar Jacoby, president of ImmigrationWorks USA, a national employer group that supports immigration reform that secures borders, strengthens workplace laws, and brings the immigrants already in the country into, and paying into, the system. "This does come up every so often ... but it hasn't gotten much traction in the past."

However, some immigration reform advocates argue that federal courts have never specifically faced the question of whether children born to illegal immigrant parents should be granted citizenship, according to a recent NPR article.

Legislation aimed to prevent citizenship from being given to U.S.-born children of unauthorized immigrant parents is also being pushed at the state level in Texas and Oklahoma.

A list of countries, by population, that grant birthright citizenship includes the United States; Brazil; Pakistan ; Mexico; Colombia; Argentina; Canada ; Peru; Venezuela; Malaysia ; Chile; Ecuador; Guatemala ; Dominican Republic; Bolivia ; Honduras; Paraguay; El Salvador; Nicaragua ; Panama; Uruguay; Jamaica; Lesotho ; Trinidad and Tobago; Fiji; Guyana; Belize ; Barbados; Saint Lucia; Saint Vincent and the Grenadines; Grenada; Antigua and Barbuda; Dominica; and Saint Christopher and Nevis.


http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Media/co ... 360&page=1

Below is the entire bill. It was introduced by former Rep. Nathan Deal, who currently is running for Governor Georgia.

Birthright Citizenship Act of 2009
HR1868
http://www.alipac.us/ftopict-156410.html

Birthright citizenship is just as big a magnet as jobs-illegals bring their spouses because they know the taxpayers will support them and the children they birth on U.S. soil. E-verify and workplace enforcement is not enough; something must be done about the hundreds of thousands of anchor babies born EVERY year in this country. Taxpayers support them, they become voters, and then are eligible to bring their family members here to live. As the birthrate of illegals is significantly higher than that of native Americans, this has huge ramifications for the future of our country.

What can be done? - The 14th Amendment

LINK: http://www.14thamendment.us/info/what_can_be_done.html

Millions of Americans have served in defense of the United States of America. Many have died to preserve the freedoms that we take for granted - freedoms granted to United States citizens by the US Constitution. Granting birthright citizenship to the children of illegal aliens whose first act in coming here is to break our laws, cheapens the meaning of our Constitution and denigrates the principle of the rule of law upon which our country was founded.

Although some experts believe that a Constitutional amendment would be necessary to remedy the misinterpretation, many believe that Congressional action would be sufficient and is urgently warranted. The 14th Amendment itself stipulates that Congress has the power to enforce its provisions by enactment of legislation. The power to enforce a law is necessarily accompanied by the authority to interpret that law. Therefore, an act of Congress stating its interpretation of the 14th Amendment - as not including the offspring of illegal aliens - is long overdue.

It should be noted that the Supreme Court stated in a footnote of the 1982 Plyler v. Doe case that "[e]very citizen or subject of another country, while domiciled here, is within the allegiance and the protection, and consequently subject to the jurisdiction, of the United States", and that "no plausible distinction with respect to Fourteenth Amendment 'jurisdiction' can be drawn between resident aliens whose entry into the United States was lawful, and resident aliens whose entry was unlawful." Yet this note specifically addressed children who were born outside of the United States, and not those born to illegal alien parents within the United States. Thus, it indeed remains within the purview of Congress to act to interpret the 14th Amendment in accordance with Article I of the Constitution.

Indeed, Congress has indeed realized the need to act. Rep. Howard Stump (AZ) introduced H.R 190 in 2001 to deny citizenship to children of illegal alien mothers. In 2003, the Citizenship Reform Act of 2003 (H.R. 1567), introduced by Rep. Nathan Deal (R-GA), was introduced to amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to deny birthright citizenship to children born in the United States to parents who are not U.S. citizens or permanent resident aliens. The Citizenship Reform Amendment (H.J. Res. 44), introduced by Rep. Mark Foley (R-FL), would have amended the U.S. Constitution to provide that no one born in the U.S. will be granted automatic U.S. citizenship unless a parent is a U.S. citizen or has been lawfully admitted for permanent residence at the time of the birth. Unfortunately, none of these bills survived.

2009 action: support H.R. 1940

Representative Nathan Deal (R-GA) has introduced H.R. 1868, The Birthright Citizenship Act of 2009. This bill would end the process of granting automatic birthright citizenship to the babies born in the United States to illegal aliens. This bill is assuredly deserving of the full support of the sovereign American People and their elected public servants. Those who wish to support this bill should contact their Representatives to ask them to cosponsor H.R. 1940.

The following article is from Business Week

Nearly All Wealthy & Emerging Nations Have Eliminated Birthright Citizenship -- We Should, Too, by Roy Beck, July 24, 2009

"Maternity tourism is just the beginning of the silliness of birthright citizenship that goes to the babies of foreign students, temporary foreign workers, international travelers--and the millions who break the law to criminally enter this country.

All told, federal law (not the Constitution) gives citizenship to an estimated minimum 400,000 babies each year who don’t have even one parent who is a U.S. citizen or permanent legal immigrant. This is a huge impediment to efforts to stabilize U.S. population to allow for environmental sustainability. And it is a great incentive for more illegal immigration.

Each of these babies becomes an anchor who retards deportation of unlawfully present parents--and who eventually will be an anchor for entire families and villages as chain migration leads to the immigration of grandparents, aunts, uncles, and cousins.

Birthright citizenship is an antiquated practice that has been abandoned by nearly all wealthy nations and emerging nations (recently India and Indonesia) and by the majority of poor nations.

The Supreme Court has ruled only that the Constitution requires babies of legal immigrants be U.S. citizens. It is time to join the modern world, pass H.R. 1868 (Birthright Citizenship Act of 2009), and limit citizenship to babies who have at least one parent who is a citizen or legal immigrant."

Author: Fred Elbel Updated: 24 July, 2009

For the Open Borders, Come And Get It crowd, being American means nothing. IMO reversing the anchor baby absurdity would be a welcome step in the direction of Americans First.

By MATT ROCHELEAU
June 13, 2010
Anyone born on American soil is an American.

That's an unconditional right, according to the 14th Amendment of the US Constitution.

Can you believe the giant lie right there? "and subject to the jurisdiction thereof" is a giant condition!! We need to dogpile on this guy go comment at the article.

Congress has the authority to exclude birthright citizenship to anyone whose parents are not U. S. citizens regardless of where they might be when the child is born. It just has to pass a law.

Originally Posted by Justthatguy

Congress has the authority to exclude birthright citizenship to anyone whose parents are not U. S. citizens regardless of where they might be when the child is born. It just has to pass a law.

Yes that is 100% true but you NEVER see that reported in the anti-American media.