Attributing the origin of "anchor baby" naturalized citizenship to "the 14th Amendment and subsequent immigration and naturalization laws" bears some refining to be usable in a courtroom.Quote:
Originally Posted by J.B. Williams
"Anchor babies" did not become commonplace for 114 years after Amendment XIV was ratified.
Rep. John A. Bingham and Sen. Jacob M. Howard co-authored Amendment XIV, which concerned the citizenship of children of non-resident aliens born on U.S. soil: in particular, freedmen and other persons emancipated during or following the Civil War. Amendment XIV made no mention of "natural born Citizen" whatsoever. It began:
What did "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" mean to the co-authors of Amendment XIV?
Sen. Lyman Trumbull, Chairman of the Judiciary Committee and author of Amendment XIII, added the jurisdiction clause to Amendment XIV. He wrote, "[T]he provision is, that 'all persons born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens.' That means 'subject to the complete jurisdiction thereof.' What do we mean by 'complete jurisdiction thereof?' Not owing allegiance to anybody else. That is what it means."
And Sen. Howard concurred.
Rep. Bingham stated in Congress:
"All from other lands, who by the terms of [congressional] laws and a compliance with their provisions become naturalized, are adopted citizens of the United States; all other persons born within the Republic, of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty, are natural born citizens. Gentleman can find no exception to this statement touching natural-born citizens except what is said in the Constitution relating to Indians." - (Cong. Globe, 37th, 2nd Sess., 1639 (1862))
Then in 1866, Rep. Bingham also stated on the House floor:
"Every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen...." - (Cong. Globe, 39th, 1st Sess., 1291 (1866))
In its unanimous decision in Minor v. Happersett (1875), the U.S. Supreme Court interpreted "natural born citizen" as:
"one born in the country
of parents who are citizens."
No other U.S. Supreme Court decision has ever countermanded or contradicted this interpretation of natural born citizen. Even the erroneous and Tory Wong Kim Ark decision did not affect the definition of "natural born Citizen," but only that of "citizen from (or by) birth," extending citizenship to persons born in the U.S. of legally resident alien parents. Justice Gray there overlooked the Amendment XIV requirement of being subject to U.S. jurisdiction, that is, to a full and complete jurisdiction on the part of the United States, meaning "subject to no other jurisdiction," which excludes dual citizens, who are also subject to the jurisdiction of another state or sovereignty.
Citizenship was conferred from father to child, from the first colonization of the U.S. at St. Augustine, Florida, in 1565, and at Plymouth, Massachusetts, in 1620, until Justice Gray invoked British Common Law in Wong Kim Ark (1898 ). Only where there was no father, through death or desertion, were exceptions made for the mother to confer her citizenship. Only where the child was a foundling, without father or mother, did birthplace generate citizenship.
To the Crown, and that only from the mid-1700's through perhaps the early 1800's, birthplace birthright citizenship was a means of claiming British-born children of foreigners as subjects of the Crown, a way of taxing foreigners who had the misfortune of being born on soil subject to the Crown, and one of a long train of abuses and usurpations design(ed) to reduce [the colonists] under absolute Despotism, until they were duty-bound to throw off such government tyranny.
Along with anchor babies, birthplace birthright citizenship gave us domestic terrorists whom the U.S. cannot deport to their nations of primary loyalty, because they claim U.S. citizenship, based upon birthplace alone.
Perhaps the scales would fall from the eyes of those who cling to the "born in the U.S. = natural born citizen" misinterpretation if they understood that birthplace was not relevant to citizenship for 110 years after the ratification of the Constitution.
- "Born in the U.S." was not even mentioned in law until the Civil Rights Act of 1866 and Amendment XIV (ratified in 1868 ).
- "Born in the U.S." did not affect citizenship until Wong Kim Ark (1898 ), when Justice Gray disregarded, ignored, and somehow did away with the "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" phrase in Amendment XIV, in order to re-institute, from the Common Law, birthplace birthright citizenship.
- "Born in the U.S." did not automatically open the door to naturalized U.S. citizenship for "anchor babies" in general until 1982, when U.S. Supreme Court Justice Harry Blackmun, author of the Roe v. Wade opinion, so extended, to the mixed multitudes of children of illegal aliens, birthplace birthright citizenship (practically speaking, except for the right to vote).
In Plyler v. Doe (1982), Justice Blackmun found that even children of illegal aliens ineligible to vote had a right to public education at the taxpayers' expense. "The right to vote, of course, is a political interest of concern to citizens. The right to an education, in contrast, is a social benefit of relevance to a substantial number of those affected by Texas' statutory scheme..." Other "anchor baby" benefits of citizenship followed.
Justice Blackmun found that illegal aliens' children had a right to be educated, and U.S. citizens' children had a right to be aborted. Better to be the son of Justice Blackmun's yardman than the son of Justice Blackmun.
Understanding the above facts corrects the widespread misunderstanding that birthplace birthright citizenship became the law of the land in 1868, when Amendment XIV was ratified. That was not the intent of the Framers of Amendment XIV, as evidenced by the "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" citizenship requirement. It did not become law until Justice Gray, by means of Wong Kim Ark, annulled, voided, or made of no effect the "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" phrase in Amendment XIV. It did not become widespread practice until Justice Blackmun made it so in Plyler v. Doe.