4 Jan

Birthright citizenship has got to end [Reader Post]

                                       

No doubt in part to the poor economy, birthright citizenship has become a target for lawmakers.

Lawmakers in at least 14 states have said they are committed to passing the legislation targeting birthright citizenship. Arizona’s anti-illegal-immigrant bill, SB-1070, was also based on model legislation that could be easily copied by states, and at least seven states are likely to pass bills similar to the first Arizona immigration overhaul this year, according to one analysis by an immigrants rights group.

It is argued that the 14th Amendment was intended to cover freed slaves. In the 19th century the Supreme Court found that the Amendment also covered the children immigrants but SCOTUS has not dealt with the children of those who have violated the law in breaking into this country illegally.

It is estimated that as many as 8% of the births in the US are to illegal alien parents.

According to the Pew Hispanic Center, approximately 340,000 of the 4.3 million babies born in the United States in 2008 were the children of illegal aliens, many of whom emanate from Mexico. The study which was released yesterday comes as more and more Americans are showing concern over illegal aliens entering the U.S. and garnering a treasure-trove of benefits such as free education, health care, and other social programs. Some conservative lawmakers wish to amend the 14th Amendment from which the court have derived the concept of “anchor babies.”

And some of those births are costly:

It was 5 a.m. and CBS News national correspondent Byron Pitts is with a woman who is nine months pregnant. She’s rushed to a south Texas hospital to undergo a C-section – a $4,700 medical procedure that won’t cost her a dime. She qualifies for emergency Medicaid.

The Rand Corporation estimated that health care for illegals cost $1.1 billion in 2008.

In 2004 the overall net cost (i.e. loss) of illegals to this country’s economy was estimated to be over $10 billion.

“Households headed by illegal aliens imposed more than $26.3 billion in costs on the federal government in 2002 and paid only $16 billion in taxes, creating a net fiscal deficit of $10.4 billion, or $2,700 per illegal household,” said Steven A. Camarota, author of the study.

And that was expected to triple if amnesty was granted.

Just who offers birthright citizenship today?

In the “developed countries” birthright citizenship is offered by only the United States and Canada. In the “other” column (presumably undeveloped or underdeveloped) many countries are listed as offering birthright citizenship.

The 14th Amendment does not speak to children of illegal aliens. Birthright citizenship was last considered by the Supreme Court before there were such things as Social Security and welfare. Do away with them and the argument becomes moot. Otherwise, financial considerations cannot be ignored. It’s costly to bear this burden and this country cannot afford frivolities any longer.

About DrJohn

DrJohn has been a health care professional for more than 30 years. In addition to clinical practice he has done extensive research and has published widely with over 70 original articles and abstracts in the peer-reviewed literature. DrJohn is well known in his field and has lectured on every continent except for Antarctica. He has been married to the same wonderful lady for over 30 years and has three kids- two sons, both of whom are attorneys and one daughter on her way into the field of education. DrJohn was brought up with the concept that one can do well if one is prepared to work hard but nothing in life is guaranteed. Except for liberals being foolish.
This entry was posted in Constitution, Immigration, political correctness, Supreme Court and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink. Tuesday, January 4th, 2011 at 5:00 am
| 3,132 views

117 Responses to Birthright citizenship has got to end [Reader Post]

  1. malize says: 101

    @MataHarley:

    The same part that apparently eludes you.

    ReplyReply
  2. MataHarley says: 102

    Then apparently it eludes SCOTUS and the State Dept too, malize. You don’t have much fire power on your side. Heaven help your immigrant clients if you profess to be an immigration attorney.

    ReplyReply
  3. MataHarley says: 103

    Mata: “So even the argument of Wong’s parental status at the time of his birth simply doesn’t work. Again, a moot point since SCOTUS never once addressed the parental status at the time of his birth in their deliberation. The fact they didn’t should really give you a heads up you’re traveling the wrong legal path here.” etc.

    malize: Wrong. The fact that they didn’t was because there was nothing to consider at that time, there was no immigration screening and no law to exclude them.

    Wrong. States were screening immigration entry in those days. However their entry or status, outside of their domiciled state, was never once brought up. Why? Because it’s irrevelant via the language of the 14th, which puts no demands on parental status. End of story.

    Odd you say “Wong can’t be used” when it’s the quintessential case for defining citizenship status in the legal world. DOH

    Now, if you want to challenge citizenship of mothers fresh from the river, fields or tunnels, and no records of domicile, you may have something. But how many of the annual estimate of 340,000 are those? Got stats? Bring ‘em out, with links please.

    ReplyReply
  4. Rob in Katy says: 104

    Many mobsters are also on record as paying taxes, sometimes that is how they get caught. It doesn’t make how they earned their money legal or right. And I suppose that you are OK with having your vote stolen by someone that entered under the cloak of darkness. Folks that can moralize away the difference between right and wrong are what is truly wrong with this country. There is no moral argument for giving away my most prized possession, my vote, to someone whose parents stole it for them…

    ReplyReply
  5. WHAT this exchange of well done comments from the same AMERICANS FOR AMERICA
    AS THE LAWS OF THE LAND WAS WRITTEN SOME HUNDREDS YEARS AGO,
    AND HAS BEEN INSTITUTE INTO AGREEING PATRIOTS OF THIS LAND,
    AND OBEYED BY COUNTLESS CITIZENS ROOTED DEEP IN THIS EARTH, ALSO OBEYED AND ACCEPTED BY THE INDIANS FIRST NATIONS ON THIS LAND REGARDLESS OF MANY INEGALITY, ON MANY FRONTS…TELLS ME THAT THE LIMIT TO ACCEPT NEW ILLEGALS HAS BEEN CROSS IN THE LAST FEW YEARS ENOUGH TO GENERATE UNDESIRED EXCHANGES,
    MEANING SOMETHING MUST BE DONE TO STOP IT YESTERDAY WAY BACK

    ReplyReply
  6. Smorgasbord says: 106

    @ILOVEBEESWARZONE: I like the way you said, “…stop it yesterday way back.” Very well said.

    ReplyReply
  7. SMORGASBORD hi, I had to reread my comment because I comment on a clck in my brain computer and when I finish, I turn on to further tought and let go on the previous,
    I am glad you like it because when I comment seriously ,I give it all
    best to you for 2011 too, thank you

    ReplyReply
  8. mari guevara says: 109

    @B-Rob: @Gomez Gil:
    what ? My parents were born in Mexico but immigrated legally to the US. My father became a citizen as a child and attented school in the US. My mother was a legal resident for years . I’m confused my brother and I are mexican citizens then? No way we were born in hospitals in LA CA and raised here! So I’m confused!!!!!! I have american citizenship and so does my daughter. But her father was a legal resident of the US! Confused! My alliance is to the US but when I’ve been to Mexico I’m viewed as an visitor not a citizen of that country! almost like a second class individual! What”s the Problem then my citizenship is dual then? thats not permitted now especially now in these times in the Us !!!!!!!!!

    ReplyReply
  9. top says: 110

    J’ai deja fait plusieur venues sur ce site je sais que je savoure à sa valeur votre gout et de tourner tous vos articles. Je vous invite à vous rendre sur mon blog dans le but de partager votre opinion. A très vite

    ReplyReply
  10. Rob in Katy says: 111

    Another reason to end it? I don’t know, but surely a reason for English only in the USA.

    ReplyReply
  11. anonymous says: 112

    leticia olalia morales of 15501 pasadena ave #8 tustin ca 92780 submitted fake documents and paid 5000 dollars to obtain a US tourist visa. she also used fake employment records to obtain a work visa. she is now applying for citizenship.

    ReplyReply
  12. J V Hoffman says: 113

    @John Cooper: Mr Cooper! Thank You! Personally no philosophical argument or judiciary rulings or What any damn judge or any legislative decisions well ever cause me to believe the absurdity that we should allow anyone who is born to an illegal to become a rightful citizen of the United States!
    The way I see it is that this makes about as much sense as an illegal alien sneaking into my garage and having a baby there makes them half owner of my Chevrolet!!!!

    The Constitution was not written in the context or intention to provide for Illegals, nor the Bill of Rights written in the interest of providing for them! No words or rulings will ever convince me that this was the intention of our Forefathers!

    You want to be a humanitarian and help someone fine! But it does not have to include CITIZENSHIP!!!

    So? If an alien from outer space comes and has a baby does that make them Human…because he was born on planet earth?

    ReplyReply
  13. OLD TROOPER 2
    HI, always nice to read your smart comments, keep them coming,
    best to you.

    ReplyReply
  14. Dorian says: 115

    I was watching a segment with Anderson Cooper on CNN discussing the topic of Anchor Babies. What does this mean to third generation Americans like myself, would we be subject in some future date to deportation?

    ReplyReply
  15. Dorian
    hi,
    you never know with those liberals, you might prefer FOX NEWS, CHECK IT UP, but for the CONSERVATIVES SIDE YOU ARE AN AMERICAN WITH ROOTS ON THE GROUND WHICH WILL MULTIPLY AND TRAVEL DEEP TO MAKE YOUR GENERATION OF AMERICANS SOLID AND FIRM when the time come to vote and change what is so wrong now,
    best to you

    ReplyReply
  16. Skookum says: 117

    Dorian, He’ll no. An anchor baby is from a woman who drops a baby on American soil without legal status, for the sole purpose of giving birth to an American. From your description of your parents, you are a bona Fidel American and you have every right to be mad as Hell about illegal aliens dropping babies just to have rights in this country.

    ReplyReply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>