Thread: Birthright citizenship still contested on Capitol Hill

Mar. 29, 2013 5:59 PM

Written by
Paul C. Barton
Gannett Washington Bureau



WASHINGTON — Amid all the talk in Congress about immigration reform, some Republicans continue to want to deny citizenship to children of illegal immigrants born in the United States.

And Rep. Diane Black, R-Gallatin, is one of them.

Although birthright citizenship is widely regarded as guaranteed by the 14th Amendment, these lawmakers contend the language of the amendment has been misinterpreted for 145 years.

They also argue the issue is more important than ever due to the phenomenon of “birth tourism” on the West Coast, as well as illegal immigrants who have children, they say, to make themselves harder to deport. Births resulting from the latter are termed “anchor babies.”

“The current broad and misguided interpretation of birthright citizenship encourages chain migration and places an unfair financial strain on our social safety net,” Black said in a statement.

“With record deficits and more than 11 million illegal aliens currently living in the United States, the last thing we need to be doing is incentivizing people to come to America for the sole purpose of giving birth in order to obtain automatic citizenship for their children, which qualifies them for taxpayer-funded programs.”

Black is one 24 Republican cosponsors of the Birthright Citizenship Act of 2013 -- filed by Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa -- that seeks to define a key phrase of the 14th Amendment.

The amendment says: “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.”

King’s bill would clarify the circumstances under which the phrase “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” applies. The U.S-born person would only be subject to U.S. jurisdiction if at least one parent was either a U.S. citizen or a national, a lawful permanent resident alien or an alien performing active service in the U.S. military.

A similar bill has been introduced in the Senate by David Vitter, Republican of Louisiana.

While such legislation was introduced in the 111th and 112th Congresses as well, it surprises some observers that GOP members would push it this year, when the party is trying to change its image with Hispanics and associate itself with immigration reform.

“What they are doing is holding their party back at a time when they need to move forward,” said Raul A. Reyes, a New York attorney who writes frequently on Hispanic issues.

“The term anchor babies is very offensive to Latinos.”

And immigration advocates contend such fears are misguided.

“If you have a child here doesn’t mean you aren’t deportable,” said Ali Noorani of the National Immigration Forum, a pro-immigration group.

Meanwhile, the newest phenomenon to catch the attention of King and other advocates for the bill is birth tourism, the practice of some Asian women, primarily from China and Korea, to come to the West Coast a few months before their children are to be born.

They stay in large houses, sometimes called “maternity hotels.” Several in Los Angeles have been cited for health violations.

They stay just long enough to have their children and file birth records, guaranteeing their offspring can return some day as an American citizen under the 14th Amendment.

While acknowledging the practice, Reyes said the number of women who come for such reasons “are in the dozens” and don’t represent a large-scale invasion.

He also contends lawmakers supporting King are on a fool’s errand in terms of constitutional interpretation. It would take a constitutional amendment, Reyes said, to change birthright citizenship.

One Old Vet - Veterans, Guns, Illegal Immigration, Border Security

http://www.htrnews.com/article/20130...nclick_check=1

or one brave Governor denying the birth certificates. boom right to the Supreme Court