Birthright Lunacy: Separating Fact from Fiction in the 14th Amendment Debate

[Ian David]

Birthright Lunacy
Separating Fact from Fiction in the 14th Amendment Debate

Some conservatives in Congress, many of who were once leaders of immigration reform efforts, have recently begun to raise a radical notion of amending the U.S. Constitution to deny citizenship to the children of some immigrant parents.

The ugly and inflammatory language of “anchor babies” and “drop and leave” may play well on right-wing TV, but it does nothing to stop illegal immigration, and instead undermines American values while imposing significant legal and administrative burdens on every American. It’s time to debunk these false claims once and for all.

Myth: The Constitution’s citizenship provisions are vague and open to interpretation.
Fact: The text of the Constitution and a succession of Supreme Court decisions could not be more clear.

The Constitution is a foundational document, not a blog for political editors. The United States adopted the Fourteenth Amendment in 1868 to ensure due process and equal protection of the laws to all persons regardless of race, color, or ancestry. Birthright citizenship was enshrined in the first sentence of the amendment: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States.”

Legislative history shows that Congress intended to give citizenship upon birth to all children, including the children of immigrants. Only two classes of children were explicitly excluded: the children of diplomats and children of some Native American tribes who maintained quasi-sovereign status in 1868. Amendments to the Constitution have historically sought to enhance civil rights. Yet an amendment repealing birthright citizenship would mark the first time the Constitution was amended to roll back fundamental rights. A movement in that direction cannot be justified by the political advancement of a handful of politicians.

The citizenship clause of the 14th Amendment has repeatedly withstood legal challenges. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in hallmark decisions in 1898 and 1982 that a person should not be denied citizenship because of his or her parents’ noncitizenship status and that children have no control over their parents’ conduct. And the Court again in 2004 accepted as settled legal fact that birth confers status.


Myth: Congress can easily modify birthright citizenship rules.
Fact: Restricting birthright citizenship can only be accomplished through constitutional amendment, an incredibly difficult and lengthy process.

<snip>

Myth: Undocumented immigrants get immigration status and other benefits from their “anchor babies.”
Fact: If takes a minimum of 21 years for a citizen child to sponsor an undocumented parent.

More:
http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2010/08/birthright_lunacy.html

[LaurenG]

1. Thanks - this was very helpful. K&R

[cleanhippie]

2. Great article! The biggest question is "How would the citizenship of parents be verified?"

For the "smaller government" yahoos, that would require MORE government intrusion into our lives to verify citizenship. And just HOW would that verification take place?

[MineralMan]

3. OK, all you teabaggers. Let's see your grandparents' birth

certificates or we're deporting you this afternoon. If you have your grandparents' BCs, we'll give you two weeks to produce their parents' birth certificates.

You will comply or you will be deported as "Anchor Babies!"

Your last name is Weaver? You get deported to England.
Aardappel? Off you go to Amsterdam.
Schmidt? Ja! Over there is the plane for Germany.

[Ian David]

6. Unless your last name is Thunderpony or Geronimo, out you all go. n/t

[Scurrilous]

4. K & R

:thumbsup:

[horseshoecrab]

5. K&R!

Thank you for posting this.

It's pretty clear who wants to change the constitution to TAKE AWAY rights that have been in place since the very beginning.

The right wing's war on babies. Idiots.

horseshoecrab