http://www.oregonlive.com

GOP platform at odds with 14th Amendment
Oregon - Denying U.S.-born children citizenship contradicts the Constitution
Tuesday, August 01, 2006
JANIE HAR
The Oregonian
An Oregon Republican Party platform stripping certain U.S.-born children of their citizenship had constitutional scholars scratching their heads Monday -- and its author admitting that his resolution is more symbolic than realistic.

But the resolution adopted without debate at the party's biennial convention last weekend also points to mounting opposition to illegal immigration and frustration over the federal deadlock over immigration reform.

The platform would deny citizenship to babies born on U.S. soil to illegal and legal immigrants who are not citizens. That would directly contradict the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which states that "all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States."

Jim Lehman, chairman of the Wasco County Republican Party, said he drafted the resolution to encourage Congress to enforce the 14th Amendment as it was intended to apply to newly freed slaves. The framers, he argued, did not intend for it to be used by illegal immigrants who want to stay in the country.

"I wanted to light a fire and the resolution was the first step," he said. "There's enough people that want to see something done and they don't want to see the abuses."

In Oregon, the Pew Hispanic Center estimates there are about 50,000 children who are U.S. citizens and born to undocumented immigrants. The Center for Immigration Studies estimates that in 2002, about 10 percent of all births in Oregon were to undocumented mothers.

Scholars agree on meaning

Constitutional scholars interviewed Monday said there is no question that the 14th Amendment grants citizenship to any child born on U.S. soil. If the Republican party's central committee doesn't like it, said Charles Hinkle, a Portland attorney and constitutional expert who also represents The Oregonian, they need to get two-thirds of Congress and three-quarters of state legislatures to sign on.

"It's one of the stupidest resolutions ever passed," Hinkle said.

"It's sort of like passing a resolution about the free speech clause, saying it applies to everybody's free speech but yours," he said.

Greg Chaimov, a government law specialist with Davis Wright Tremaine, was more diplomatic.

"I am not aware of any dispute among constitutional scholars about the meaning of the first clause of the 14th Amendment," he said.

About 70 central committee party members voted on the proposal as part of several resolutions, said Amy Langdon, the party's executive director. She said she doubted it would go beyond the state committee and called it "more of a statement to let people know where we stand."

Debated in U.S. House

Last year, members of the Republican-controlled U.S. House debated whether to end birthright citizenship as part of efforts to reduce illegal immigration. Supporters argued that the United States is among a handful of developed countries that grants automatic citizenship to anyone born within its borders, prompting abuse by undocumented immigrants who come to the country to have children.

Across the country, cities and states have taken up legislation hostile to undocumented immigrants.

Earlier this month, the Springfield City Council refused to consider an ordinance adopted by Hazleton, Pa., and considered by other municipalities. The Illegal Immigration Relief Act fines landlords for renting to undocumented tenants and requires public documents to be written in English.

Such actions are racist and unproductive, said Ramon Ramirez, president of the state's farmworkers and tree planters union, who called the Oregon Republican party's platform "a slap in the face of the Latino community."

"It's exacerbating xenophobia in the broader community and they're making immigrants scapegoats," he said.

Former state Republican party chairman Kevin Mannix, who lost a bid for governor last May, said he would have coaxed members away from a resolution targeting children had he attended the convention. Mannix, who was released from the hospital Friday night after surgery, said he worries that in their zeal to address legitimate constitutional issues, members may come across as insensitive.

Independent political analyst Jim Moore, who teaches political science at Pacific University, was blunt in assessing actions by the central committee -- often the most partisan members -- as futile.

"They're good for sound bites," he said, "and almost totally irrelevant to the election."

Janie Har: 503-221-8213; janiehar@news.oregonian.com