
I have friends who came here from another country to work for a few years. They had two children when they arrived in the United States and had a third child while they were living here. They sent their kids to school here, used our health care system, and availed themselves for many years of the wonderful things America has to offer.
How are you feeling about them right now?
Their third child, according to the U.S. Constitution, is an American citizen because of happenstance of birth, even though the rest of the family has citizenship in another country.
How are you feeling about them now?
When I tell you the family is British, does that change your initial reaction?
Apparently that last fact matters a great deal to people like Arizona State Senator Russell Pearce, who wants a law to preclude the American-born children of illegal immigrants from being given U.S. birth certificates, believing that will prevent them from becoming U.S. citizens.
Pearce contends it was never the intent of our Constitutional framers to bestow citizenship on those children, so why not pass a law saying just that?
Isn't it funny that some conservatives like strict constitutional construction until it doesn't suit their purposes, and then they're fine with looking at the underlying intent rather than the explicit words? And can I also point out that the founding fathers essentially WERE illegal immigrants!? That would mean, under Senator Pearce's thinking, that John Quincy Adams should never have been president. The native Americans certainly didn't give those people whose skin color was different from theirs permission to land here, take over their property, and impose a new form of government. But I digress.
Unfortunately, the pattern regarding who we want to be here and who we don't often does involve skin color, and not how one got into the country in the first place. Otherwise, I'm not sure how to square the "birthers" problem with President Obama with the consensus that John McCain is a "natural-born" citizen, even though he wasn't born on U.S. soil.
And if the color of one's skin isn't the issue, then explain to me how Arizona officials are going to enforce their newly passed SB 1070, which gives police in Arizona the right stop and interrogate anyone they believe is an illegal immigrant.
I understand there are a lot of mixed feelings when it comes to the question of immigration and who should be allowed to become an American (though these days with BP, the economy, Wall Street fraud, and a whole host of other issues, you'd think more people would run from the border and not toward it).
I was talking with a family member recently who fled the Holocaust when she was a child and came here, who remembered the boat loads of German Jews who were turned away from America because there was no one who would vouch for them -- who would ensure that they wouldn't become a financial burden on the United States. While the very liberal part of this woman wanted to be in support of illegal immigrants and their children, she also couldn't help remembering the thousands of Germans who were sent away to certain death in Hitler's concentration camps because our immigration laws at the time were so strict.
So what's the answer to our immigration dilemma? At least as far as children who are born on American soil are concerned, there's really no debate -- the Constitution is pretty clear on that (sorry, State Senator Pearce).
The 14th Amendment says,
"All persons, born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States."
It's safe to say that we have an issue with illegal immigration in our country and that we need a solution. But trying to solve something from a place of hate isn't much of an example for our kids, is it?
Image via Photobucket
Aside from writing her weekly column here at The Stir, you can find Joanne Bamberger hanging out at her place, PunditMom, where she writes about the intersection of motherhood and politics.
Do People Who Have Kids Deserve Special Treatment?
Controversy: Gwen Stefani Bleaches Her Son's Hair
A '50 Shades of Grey' Shortcut for Busy Moms
Latest on Baby in Washing Machine Case (VIDEO)
Are People Who Eat Organic Judgy & Mean?
A Dad's Perspective on Playdates
Bagged Salad Recall Sparks New Fears
Help Dying 4-Year-Old Fulfill His Bucket List (VIDEO)
Melissa McCarthy & Sandra Bullock's Buddy Cop Movie
Do Working Moms Have It Easy?
Your Morning Coffee Could Save Your Life
Join the Fight Against Toxic Kids' Products
8 Summery Sweet Popsicles You Can Make at Home
Guy Gets Chest Waxed on National TV (VIDEO)
14 Ways to Be a Happier Mom
Emma Lives with Severe Food Allergies
How to Pack a No-Waste Lunch
Memorial Day Survival Guide
Backstage at Mamma Mia! with Irene Bunis

Comments (31)
Of course, many in Washington realize birthright hinders our efforts to curb illegal immigration. Many foreign families are experiencing heartache right now because their pockets were bigger than their brains. College grads w/no social security card??? Ouch! I am frustrated with our southern neighbors. Yes, America has had to deal with many immigrant groups, but walking across? swimming across? stuffing selves into trucks? invading our govt run institutions such as schools and health facilities? I'm not a happy camper being a minority in my own country.
Why don't they just go ahead and sterilize them all? I mean, that would solve the whole problem right there, right? (I'm being sarcastic of course). There is no easy answer to this problem. But until we get some kind of overarching solution to the problem of immigration as a whole, people need to try to place themselves in the shoes of these immigrants. If we found ourselves in their situation, wouldn't we do whatever we could to try to make a better life for our families?
Were your British friends here illegally? Were they working under the table and sending the majority of their earnings back home to England? The flaw in the argument is that these are ILLEGAL immigrants we're talking about. No other 1st world country in the world has as liberal of an immigration policy as the US does. My goodness, look at the draconian measures Mexico (MEXICO!) takes to keep illegal immigrants out. It is downright comical that the corrupt president of that country would come here to criticize a law that is far less harsh than the ones in his own country. It is shameful that our own president would not only allow him but clap him on the back for it.
The Arizona bill does NOT require police to check immigration status as a first offense, they must have made contact for another reason. California already has a law very similar to this one that their democrat congress enacted there some years back. Ironic that California cities would boycott Arizona.
Interesting how liberals think of the constitution as such a fluid document until it proves their point. And then all of a sudden, its word is gospel. There is a difference between someone who immigrated here legally, who's American-born children are automatically citizens, and someone who decided that laws don't apply to them and came here illegally when they are 9 months pregnant with the plan to cement their status with a child. Yes, I feel for those babies, but it has to stop somewhere.
If you expect people to believe your blather at least use some facts instead of emotional garbage and attempted guilt trips.
SB1070 requires the person to legally stopped, detained, or arrested before checking their immigration status.
Congress has wide latitude on immigration issues, anchor babies are an immigration issue, end of story.
Further, the original intent of an amendment as noted in historical documents are legitimate for courts to review when interpreting a law.
Apparently the current views of the citizenry in the US are also legitimate for the Supreme Court to consider, and the US citizenry. According to Rasmussen 58% reject citizenship for children of illegal immigrants born in the US.
You lose.
The real problem here is border violence, which many people are ignoring because of a perceived notion of racism. This is Federal Law already. There is no difference between the existing Federal Law and SB1070. Governor Brewer is trying to call attention to this border violence problem. Arizona has begged for federal assistance to send more manpower and funds to the border. When these pleas for help went unanswered, SB1070 was signed. We have known terrorists just walking into the country from Mexico. Drugs like meth, marijuana and cocaine just flow across the border, giving more power and wealth to the cartels who can do whatever they want. Buenos Aires Wildlife Refuge in Southern Arizona has been closed due to the violence. So, I suppose we've given it back to Mexico. It's amazing that so much time and energy is being focused on the "racism" of Arizona, when SB1070 no different than the Federal law. Underlying hate? Hate has NOTHING to do with this, unless it is hatred against terrorism, drugs and violence. I live on the Arizona border. Yet, to keep you happy, I am supposed to just let the violence continue and pray that I don't cross paths with a drug lord or terrorist. After all, they are focused on distributing drugs and attacking the bigger cities. I just have to stay out of their way. Read SB170 and read the Federal law in reference to immigration. Pay a visit to the border and see things from this perspective before you accuse us of hate.
See, I can't get a feeling for your friends, because you don't specify whether= they are here or not illegally.
And the anchor baby thing is just a whole other issue. I don't agree with changing the Constitution, but I also don't agree with illegal immigrants using the babies to get access to our goods and services, which is exactly what happens. I think what we really need is welfare reform.
UGH, TACO, she is NOT A MORON!!!!!
You know, it's a so disgusting thing when people play on sentiments.....the situation with anchor babies is the same - but it's time to limit American hospitality. If the flood of illegal immigrants continues to emerge into the country, there will be no more good opportunities left and the American society, such as we know it, built on the rule of law will no longer exist.
Arizona Go!
Share your thoughts on http://immigration.civiltalks.com/
Thank You for the wonderful article. You are totally right. As far as I am concerned, the founding fathers (some of them) were indeed illegal aliens. In fact Texas was stolen from Mexico by the illegal aliens who lived on Mexico's land.
And you, Morons (those who call other people morons in this blog)! What makes you an American, the fact that your were born here or the fact that some of you (a good number) carry a passport that allows you to claim welfare. Tell me what is better - a Mexican who is working day and night contributing to the price competitiveness of our US products or those lazy bums that live of welfare.
Uncontrolled immigration is a problem since we can not weed out the criminals. But it is happening because our system is so tight that hardworking people can not come here. We should let people in, but require them to learn English and pass a Constitution exam and require 5000 hours of community service. This will be a good start of an American dream.
Where to start -- if you're here in the U.S., no matter how you are here you are subject to the country's jurisdiction (unless the president sends you to Guantanamo or some other rendition country -- that's the whole point of that).
Second, of course my friends were here legally -- but the point is, that until you knew they were here from England (i.e., white) instead of across our Southern border (i.e., brown), there was a different reaction.
Third, they can stop lots of white people legally and I'm betting their papers won't ge checked. Lots of traffic stops are "legal," even if contrived -- let's see how the numbers bear out on this one. In other decades I would say until the Supreme Court overturns the law as unconsitutional, but not this one.
Fourth, I'm glad so many of you are enjoying your first amendment rights by calling me a moron. That's helpful for civil political discourse.