Report: Illegal population to soar if birthright citizenship repealed

[pampango]

Source: Orange County Register

As the debate heats up over automatic citizenship for those born in the U.S., a report released Wednesday states that doing away with birthright citizenship would spark a rise in the population of those who are in the country illegally. Members of the anti-illegal immigration movement contend that ending birthright citizenship for the children of those in the country illegally would reduce illegal immigration to the United States or keep foreigners from overstaying their visas.

However, the report "The Demographic Impact of Repealing Birthright Citizenship" states that eliminating birthright citizenship would not shrink the unauthorized population but likely expand it by 5 million people in the next decade.

The report was co-authored by Jennifer Van Hook at the Population Research Institute Pennsylvania State University and Michael Fix with the Migration Policy Institute, a non-partisan Washington, D.C., think-tank that studies the movement of people worldwide.

While estimates vary, the report states that about 11 million people live in the country illegally, many who have or plan to give birth to U.S.-born children. "And these children grow up to have children of their own," the report states. "Under a constitutional repeal of the birthright citizenship language of the 14th Amendment or the proposed Birthright Citizenship Act of 2009, these U.S.-born descendents of unauthorized immigrants would be denied legal status in the United States, even though in all likelihood they would be thoroughly American in other respects."

Read more: http://www.ocregister.com/news/citizenship-265554-birthright-states.html

---

I realize that teabaggers and the repub base don't read (or need) studies (pandering requires only emotions, not logic), but they can put this in their pipe and smoke it. :)

[ProgressiveEconomist]

1. W/o birthright citizenship, would the children be citizens of ANY country? Or would

they be "stateless", unable to travel legally to any other country, not even Mexico?

[harmonicon]

9. it would depend where their parents were from, I guess

Different countries have different laws about these things. As far as I'm concerned, citizenship from birth is a very large part of what makes the US the US. Without that, it would be wholly different country, and not one that I'd be proud to be a citizen of.

[primavera]

11. You're proud to be a citizen of it now?

I envy you, I haven't been proud to be a citizen of the US since the Carter administration - lol!

[harmonicon]

15. I have mixed feelings about it.

I've lived in Europe for a few years now and honestly don't plan on ever moving back to the US. Despite that, growing up there and being from there shapes my identity whether I like it or not. I'm certainly not ashamed of it, and some things I'm quite proud of. I still like taking part in political discussions about the country and having a stake in its future.

[primavera]

16. You're lucky

I lived in Europe for a few years and am beginning to wish I'd stayed. Now it's too hard to get residency there. I would love to feel some sense of pride in my country again, but I'm losing hope that the US will do the kinds of things that would allow me to be proud of it within my lifetime, at least.

[Lightning Count]

13. It would be the same as most other countries in the world

You would be a citizen of your parents country.

[pettypace]

2. The law wouldn't be retroactive

The law would take effect on Jan 1 2012 (let's say).

So at that point, people would no longer have any incentive in going to the US with the intent of have "anchor" children.

It would be a deterrant.



I'm speculating of course.

[Glidescube2]

3. Or they can

Amend the constitution and make it retroactive.

[liberation]

7. What level of recursion do these assholes think they can get away with?

Because if they make this stupidity retroactive, and we follow its ultimate consequence, it will mean everybody here is illegal... other than the native Americans. Or ironically, the shitload of Mexicans who can trace their family trees to states in the SouthWest waaaaaaay before any Mr. Smith showed up.

WTF is wrong with these people?

[Posteritatis]

14. They'd have to amend it twice to retroactively repeal birthright citizenship

And frankly, retroactive citizenship-denying legislation's really one of those things that should result in people skipping a few steps in the Four Boxes if a government actually tries that kind of stunt.

[harmonicon]

10. No one does that now.

It's a right-wing myth, created to instill fear in those who want an all-white country. There is zero evidence that anyone moves to the US illegal for the explicit purpose of having their children be US citizens.

[cosmicone]

4. No such law is possible any time soon

Amending the constitution is not that easy anymore ... fortunately!

[aquart]

5. It is NOT going to be repealed.

This is this year's gay marriage amendment, flag burning amendment. It's pretend work to show their constituents instead of ACTUAL work, like legislation that will create jobs or protect food and whistleblowers and bridges.

[Ozymanithrax]

6. The Civil Rights Act of 1866 granted citizen ship to all people born in the U.S.

The Amendment overrule the Dred Scott decision that denied citizenship to blacks.

No one will quickly amend the Constitution to remove this. The Cons stir this pot to keep their voters angry and willing to vote.

[JDPriestly]

8. Revoking birthright citizenship would cause many culturally an

linguistically American children to be basically stateless. Imagine a teenager 17 years old who has lived in the U.S. with his parents all his life suddenly being deported back to Guatemala, a place he has never even visited.

It is unfair an unrealistic to do away with birthright citizenship.

[Lightning Count]

12. We don't have to imagine. We can learn about it first hand.

http://www.thelocal.de/society/20100819-29267.html

[JDPriestly]

17. There is an old story entitled "The Man Without a Country"

It involves a soldier named Nolan and Raymond Burr.

[KakistocracyHater]

18. repeal the 14th at your own peril.........you'd have to be really stupid or

really arrogant to feel that your family tree would somehow be exempt. I see this & think how many years can they go back? The wingers have already started to try to get people thrown out who've been here 20 + years. Plus, look at Lieberman, self-apply it

[bemildred]

19. This sounds like a job for Obviousman! nt