Is It Time To End Anchor Baby Americanization?
In response to a question by the media asking President Trump if he plans to issue an executive order on birthright citizenship the President answered that he is looking “very seriously” at the law of birthright citizenship. He did even go as far to say that he is considering issuing an executive order.
Another more familiar term for “birthright citizenship” is “Anchor Babe.”
A baby born in the United States receives American citizenship under the 1898 interpretation by the U.S. Supreme Court of the Fourteenth Amendment. Today we still use that interpretation when it comes to illegal aliens. If you touch U.S. soil anywhere in the world including U.S. territories, and a second later delivery a baby that baby is now a U.S. citizen.
The U.S. Supreme case I am referring to is United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898). The Cornell Law School stated that in that case the Court ruled that:
a child born in the United States, of parents of Chinese descent, who, at the time of his birth, are subjects of the Emperor of China, but have a permanent domicil and residence in the United States, and are there carrying on business, and are not employed in any diplomatic or official capacity under the Emperor of China", automatically became a U.S. citizen at birth.
In the words of a 2007 legal analysis of events following the Wong Kim Ark decision, "The parameters of the jus soli principle, as stated by the court in Wong Kim Ark, have never been seriously questioned by the Supreme Court, and have been accepted as dogma by lower courts." A 2010 review of the history of the Citizenship Clause notes that the Wong Kim Ark decision held that the guarantee of birthright citizenship "applies to children of foreigners present on American soil" and states that the Supreme Court "has not re-examined this issue since the concept of 'illegal alien' entered the language."
Is it time for the United States Supreme Court to revisit this issue and case and give their updated opinion on the 14th amendment?
Let us put politics aside, let’s put aside whether President Trump can or cannot sign an executive order to end the Anchor Baby issue, let us put aside emotional reasons and ask the U.S. Supreme Court to rule.
The following is a list of Countries who offer birthright citizenship”
1 Antigua and Barbuda
12 El Salvador
24 Saint Kitts and Nevis
25 Saint Lucia
26 Saint Vincent and the Grenadines
27 Trinidad and Tobago
28 United States
You might notice that almost this entire list is in the western hemisphere. There are no western European countries or Australia, New Zealand or most any other major countries outside of North America and Mexico that are on this list.
You should ask the question why that is so, why are the enlightened countries we are constantly lectured about not on this list.
If you go to Numberusa.com you will find a map of countries that offer birthright citizenship and those that do not, pay particular attention to the countries in white they do not.
Politics aside is it time to stop our Anchor Baby issue and resume normal immigration like most of the rest of the modern world?
I think it is time for the Unites States Supreme Court to take this case up and determine what the 14th amendment actually means to us today. The last time they ruled on this amendment they really did not clarify what jurisdiction meant.
The Heritage Foundation has a great piece about this issue titled Birthright Citizenship: A Fundamental Misunderstanding of the 14th Amendment.
The video below by Dr. John Eastman also explains this Birthright Citizenship/Anchor Baby issue very well: