Sign up for our newsletter

Below is a very interesting article which I ask you to please share on your social media accounts.

The information listed is from Progressives for Immigration Reform.

If President Trump’s promise to end birthright citizenship does nothing else, it will spark the long overdue debate about the constitutional legality of conferring citizenship to all children born on U.S. soil including those delivered by unlawfully present mothers.

Birthright citizenship, also referred to as jus soli or “right of the soil,” has been for decades the improper reading and implementation of the 14th Amendment. Under the jus soli interpretation, children born on American soil, even though their parents are foreign nationals, automatically become U.S. citizens. The opposing argument contends that jus sanguinis should prevail – blood rights that confer birth citizenship only to the children of citizens or lawfully present immigrants.

Facts must be separated from the fiction put forth by media and the pro-immigration lobby. Fact: birthright citizenship is a huge illegal immigration magnet. As a U.S. citizen, a child qualifies for affirmative benefits, free K-12 education, and more affordable in-state college tuition fees. When the child turns 21, he can petition other family members to join him, and thus begin the chain migration process that adds approximately four additional residents per each original immigrant.

From a population growth perspective alone, birthright citizenship is a major driver. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that at least 4.5 million U.S. citizen anchor babies under the age of 18 live in the U.S. CBO’s estimate excludes the millions of over-18 anchor babies or those living overseas with their deported foreign parents. At least another 600,000 citizen children will be born in the U.S. within the next few years, according to CBO.

Fact: birthright citizenship has spawned the disgraceful birth tourism industry wherein wealthy Chinese, Koreans, Turks and others from overseas pay unscrupulous maternity hotel operators room and board while they await their citizen child’s birth.

There are criminal elements in birth tourism. Lying on a visa application – declaring that the visitor is coming to the U.S. as a tourist when her true purpose is to give birth – is a crime. Some of the hotel owners violate municipal building and zoning codes, as well as certain health regulations. Federal agents have launched several California investigations where birth tourism thrives, but their efforts have not deterred those eager to deliver a “U.S. citizen.”

Fact: Only two fully developed countries offer birthright citizenship, Canada and the U.S. Because of abuse and fraud, other advanced nations like Australia, New Zealand, Ireland, France, Germany, the UK, Vatican City and others abandoned automatic citizenship years ago. Those countries recognized birthright citizenship’s folly; the U.S. persists in the untenable practice.

Fiction: The federal government has no legal authority to end birthright citizenship. It appears to be the mainstream media’s near-unanimously held position that they cannot. In its headline story, The Washington Post declared that President Trump’s executive order, should he issue it, “would run afoul of the Constitution.” The Associated Press headline was “Trump Far Off Track on Birthright Citizenship,” and The Atlantic wrote, “Trump’s Plan to End Birthright Citizenship Takes Direct Aim at the Constitution.”

Fact: The Supreme Court has never ruled on birthright citizenship, and respected constitutional scholars have politely disagreed over the practice’s legitimacy. Writing in The New York Times, Chapman University Professor John Eastman noted that the Constitution doesn’t mandate birthright citizenship, and that Section 1 of the 14th Amendment disqualifies illegal immigrants’ children – that they must be “subject to the jurisdiction of…” meaning they cannot have allegiance to another nation. Professor Chapman’s detractors contend that the issue is an open and shut case. They demand “Constitutional originalism.” Those born in the U.S. are U.S. citizens, period.

Birthright citizenship’s fate is of vital importance to every American and merits an eventual Supreme Court decision, not the controversial Executive Order President Trump proposed. Although it may be too much to expect in today’s political climate, the Supreme Court could finally resolve birthright citizenship’s legality.

Joe Guzzardi is a Progressives for Immigration Reform analyst who has written about immigration for more than three decades. Contact Joe at [email protected]

Sign up for our newsletter

Click here to join the comments

Previous articleREPORT: Vote-counting machine problems blamed on ‘humidity’
Next articleVIDEO: Widow of Utah mayor killed in Afghanistan speaks out as husband’s body returned home


  1. That one word means that any person that is here illegally is not under the JURISDICTION of the U. S. therefore a baby born of such parent will not be a citizen. The Birthright interpretation was started in the 60’s by Democrats to restart immigration. The Supreme court has looked at the 14th Amendment but it does need a legitimate case for a current opinion.

  2. Ron Wood
    May 2010

    Constitutional Disregard
    There has been a devastating misinterpretation of our Constitution that has had a very negative result on American society. The assumption that anyone born on U. S. soil is automatically an American citizen is a profound misunderstanding of what the Constitution intended regarding to when a person is a citizen of the United States.

    The following is what is stated in our Constitution regarding citizenship word for word:

    ‘All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.’

    The meaning of jurisdiction as described in the Constitution…,
    JURISDICTION: jurisdiction n the power, right, or authority to interpret and apply the law : the limits or territory within which authority may be exercised

    The key word in the first line is ‘and’ as in ‘and subject to the jurisdiction…’. It is not ‘is’ as in ‘is subject to the jurisdiction…,’. The word ‘and’ indicates where the child and parents are subject to.

    Only those born here or is a naturalized citizen and is under American jurisdiction can be and is a U.S. citizen

    Since a non-American is a subject of a different country’s jurisdiction, that child cannot be a U. S. citizen. When a visitors to this country has a child born to them while on U. S. soil, that child is a citizen of the country the parents are from.

    Example: a visitor to the U. S. From Brazil has a child while here in America, that child is a citizen of Brazil because the parent is a Brazilian Citizen. Since the jurisdiction of Brazil has authority on the Brazilian parents, that child born here in America of those Brazilian parents is not an American citizen.

    Thus is true of any and all others from various countries where they are a visitor to this country, their offspring are the citizen of the country from where the parent of the offspring is from. When a visitor to this country make efforts and does the deed of becoming a U. S. citizen then the offspring , being a minor child, automatically becomes an American citizen.

    Keep in mind that if an American citizen goes to another country and has a child, that child is a citizen of America because the parents are American citizens. That child of the American citizens is not a citizen of the country the parents happen to be in at the time of birth where they be outside the confines of America.

    It appears the intentional misinterpretation was a deliberate political ploy by those that wanted to garner a greater voting base. That would be a compelling initiative to cast votes under deception.

    That source of deception can be tied to those that would furnish amnesty to illegal entrants that cross our borders daily. We need to be strong and resilient against the anti-American tide that is drowning our freedoms and Constitutional rights under that tide of progressivism.

  3. Followup: Automatic citizenship pertaining to children born in the United States is for those born here of US citizens…only. It does not apply to aliens whether they be here legally or illegally. When an alien becomes a US citizen, then, and only then, are their children automatically US citizens.

Comments are closed.