TN: Duncan gaining support for bill
Duncan gaining support for bill
Republicans say citizenship not birthright for immigrants' kids
By Michael Collins
Knoxville News Sentinel
Posted August 7, 2010 at midnight
WASHINGTON - U.S. Rep. John J. Duncan Jr. seemed as if he was virtually alone when he put his name on a bill to deny citizenship to U.S.-born children of illegal immigrants. That was last year. This year, the idea is catching on.
Frustrated by Congress' efforts to curb illegal immigration, a number of prominent Republicans are suggesting the time has come to consider repealing or rewriting the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which guarantees citizenship to anyone born in the United States.
"It's a very difficult thing to amend the Constitution, and it should be a difficult process," said Duncan, a Knoxville Republican. "But the great majority of the people, overwhelming majorities, are really fed up with illegal immigration. People are just kind of at the end of their rope about it, really."
The 14th Amendment, ratified in 1868 to guarantee citizenship to children of former slaves and other immigrant communities, declares that all persons born or naturalized in the United States and "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" are citizens.
But opponents of illegal immigration say many foreigners are taking advantage of the amendment's citizenship clause in a way in which it was never intended.
Many, they say, cross the borders illegally for the sole purpose of giving birth in the United States, believing they will then be allowed to petition for visas to stay in the country because their children are American citizens.
Advocates for Latino groups and immigrants' rights say ending automatic citizenship for children born to undocumented immigrants would strike at a core American value and would do little to curb illegal immigration since most come to the United States looking for a job. They also suggest Republicans are bringing up the issue now in an effort to win votes in this fall's elections.
"What's going on here is politics," said Elias Feghali, spokesman for the Tennessee Immigrant and Refugee Rights Coalition. "It's fine to have an immigration debate, where people can sit down on both sides of the issue and discuss what is the realistic path forward to reform the system. But it's a whole other thing to use immigrants as a scapegoat, as a cheap way to get some votes."
When the latest proposal was introduced last year in the U.S. House, just two lawmakers signed on: Duncan and the bill's primary sponsor, U.S. Rep. Elton Gallegly, R-Calif.
Though still considered a long shot, the idea started to gain attention last week when U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham, a South Carolina Republican who had been a lead negotiator on immigration reform, said he might file a bill to end birthright citizenship for children of illegal immigrants.
Other prominent Republicans quickly came forward and said it's something Congress should consider. They include Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky; U.S. Sen. John McCain of Arizona, the party's presidential nominee in 2008; U.S. Sen. Jeff Sessions of Alabama, the top Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee; and U.S. Sen. Jon Kyl of Arizona, the Senate's No. 2 Republican.
"The reason there is a debate about birthright citizenship is that we've lost control of our borders," said U.S. Sen. Lamar Alexander, the Senate's third-ranking Republican.
Alexander's office did not say whether the Maryville Republican supports denying automatic citizenship to children of illegal immigrants.
U.S. Sen. Bob Corker, R-Chattanooga, "thinks we should look at all policies that may have the effect of encouraging illegal immigration," said his spokeswoman, Laura Herzog.
Many legal experts say the only way to end automatic citizenship would be to amend the Constitution, which could take years and probably would not be successful.
But lawmakers could also try to end birthright citizenship through legislation. That approach would likely focus on the 14th Amendment phrase "subject to the jurisdiction thereof." Congress could pass a law declaring that illegal immigrants are not "subject to the jurisdiction" of the United States because they entered the country illegally, thus making their children ineligible for citizenship.
That, however, would be a stretch and would almost certainly result in a prolonged battle in court, said Peter Spiro, a professor and citizenship scholar at Temple University School of Law in Philadelphia.
"If I were handicapping it," Spiro said, "I would be willing to bet some serious money on the court finding the (citizenship) rule to be a constitutional one."
Only a handful of countries bestow citizenship upon anyone born within their borders. Besides the United States, birthright citizenship is in practice in Canada and some Latin countries, including Brazil, Mexico, Venezuela and the Dominican Republic, but nowhere in Europe.
Duncan said ratifying the 14th Amendment was the right thing because it gave citizenship rights to the children of slaves who were brought to the United States against their will. But at the time, he said, no one could have imagined the immigration issues the country is now facing.
"I don't think we ought to grant birthright citizenship to children of illegal immigrants," he said. "We shouldn't give people who are here illegally the same rights as we give to people who are here legally. To me, it's that simple."
Feghali, however, said ending birthright citizenship could lead to consequences that no one can foresee.
"The last thing we need," he said, "are government agencies in delivery rooms inspecting newborns to see whether they're 'real Americans.' ''
www.knoxnews.com
