The Debate Over Immigration and Birthright Citizenship
http://thedianerehmshow.org/shows/2010-08-04/debate-over-immigration-and-birthright-citizenship
Some conservative lawmakers have suggested eliminating automatic citizenship for children of illegal immigrants. We take a look at the implications of increasing political pressure for new immigration laws.
Guests
Rosemary Jenks
director of government relations, NumbersUSA.
Angela Kelley
vice president for immigration policy and advocacy, Center for American Progress.
Julia Preston
national immigration correspondent for The New York Times.
Mark Krikorian
executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies.
Comments
Please familiarize yourself with our Code of Conduct and Terms of Use before posting your comments.
Our history is riddled with witch hunts, starting with the witch hunts of the 1600's. The Native Americans, the African Americans, the Japanese, the list goes on and on. When we reflect on these events, long after the damage has been done, we realize the incredible injustice and lack of humanity of which we are capable. We are a nation of immigrants but once here seem to be able to rationalize policies that are in fact the opposite of the principles we say we value.
Before I am accussed of racism, be aware that I am Latina.
What isn't discussed is the Catholic Church's active encouragement of illegal immigration and their most corrupt and evil reasons. After the scandals of pedophelia, they basically have run out of church members in the anglo community.
Latin American culture is repressive colonialist culture where priests have had a free-reign of sexual abuse without any dialogue, therefore legal repercussions. One of the main factors in this bizarre phenomemon is indigenous culture's shame towards such topics. This is why in Latin America child sexual abuse is a silent epidemic that has spread from the church to the general population.
The quiet Catholic counter leadership is enabling illegal immigration on a local level.
My daughter was born in Denmark when we were living there on a work visa in the late 1980's. She was not afforded a dual citizenship opportunity. Further in order to renew our work visas/residency permits my wife and I had to appear once a year at the immigration HQ to sign papers that we would not divorce in the next 12 months. Our residency permits were only renewed for 12 months at a time. Both my wife's and my family have been US citizens for several generations or more. Neither of us qualify for an ethnic minority on US census forms. So, the immigration laws of Europe don't seem to be ethnically biased as the speaker indicated her example of Germany....but they are protective as to whom can qualify for legal residency and avail themselves of the social support systems. The US custom of granting citizenship based on place of birth is not the norm the world over.
When I immigrated to the USA it was made very clear to me that I was required to carry my green card and state id until I achieved citizenship. I expected that I would be required on occasion to prove who I was and always realized I was nothing but a guest in this country. It was also made clear that failure to adhere was grounds for denying my bid for citizenship. I did carry it with me, I was required to prove my status on
ultiple occaions and I am now proudly a citizen of the USA. I can't understand why anyone expecting to achieve citizenship in this country would mot expect that they would need to identify themselves to authorities at any time during the process of achieving citizenship. It's a small price to pay to become a citizen of this great country
I came to this country legally as a student, got hired as a higly skilled employee after graduation and followed the utterly inefficient Immigration process (INS) to become a premanent resident and then a U.S citizen. I know or read of countless number of highly skilled folks who pay taxes, get assimilated to the society waiting at least a minimum of 5 and in some cases up to 10 years to get their permanent residency(green-card). So it really bothers me when the so called experts talk about providing permanent residency or path to citizenship to folks (illegals) who did not follow the law. USA is supposed to be the land that upholds the law and we are trying to promote behavior that utterly disrepects it.
You are ignoring the main problem, only one single population flowing constantly. A new homogeny for the purpose of creating a passive and silent, rightless population is not what America is about.
Incredible.
We have an amendment originally intended to grant citizenship to Americans forced into degrading slavery.
We now have foreign citizens giving birth on U.S. soil and guaranteeing that their children have U.S. citizenship.
And illegal alien parents with U.S.-born children exploit the spectacle of "breaking up families" in order to practically exempt themselves from deportation.
It appears that fertility has become a major criterion for immigration, thanks to this absurd situation.
What a country.
I was born and raised overseas. After a devastating war in 1948, I was only 10 yrs. old,and now we are refugees. my father apllied for a USA residency. We where excepted in 1952 but not allowed in as he was (and I quate), "Not Self Suficient" and there was no one to sponsor 10 of us. So he started sending us one at a time starting in 1952, next 1953, next was I 1955 and so on till we all made it to the USA our adopted country. Dad was able to do that as the Barkleys Bank of England started sending him his paycheck after they found where we were.
All this depate blows my mind. Those people are ILLEAGAL period. There is nothing to debate, they have broken our law. Tell me. What major country in this Universe allows this to happen to them.
SAMIAM.
I'm disappointed with the punditry - the callers had a deeper perspective - arguing about the immigrants themselves gets us nowhere and keeps the debate political - call American employers, who keep American politicians in their pockets, and Mexico to account - I expect the DR show to ask better questions - why can't Mexico create an economy that employs its people? The rest of the discussion is superfluous - if these were Canadian immigrants it would be a totally different situation.
By the way, people feeling that America "has no heart" (or that our laws don't, that is) over this whole illegal situation --- they need to check out Mexico's very strict immigration laws. Mexico would be rounding these people up and fining and imprisoning them!!
Of course, Obama has stated that one reason he's against AZ's enforcement of Fed. laws (which the feds FAIL to enforce per the Feds' DUTY) is that it would "offend Mexico and America's relationship with them!!
Obamaworld is a very strange, unfathomable land, to put it as delicately as I can.
I confess ignorance about our history of immigration law. Before the 14th amendment, how was citizenship granted? How was citizenship originally granted when the constitution was adopted?
What prompted the adoption of the 14th amendment? (I think it was to eliminate practices that prevented freed slaves from exercising the rights of citizenship)
If the interpretation of the 14th amendment is changed, would the new interpretation be applied retroactively? I don't know how I would document that I have an ancestor with legitimate citizenship.
Why are Fox viewers coming to NPR?
Only a neo-nazi would suggest that an immigration situation that has existed for more than 40 years was created by Obama and began in 2008 or would have the mind to propose that the Arizona law is not a civil rights and constitutional issue that would affect ALL people of color, whatever their country of birth, and confuse this with an immigration policy.
The issue is right to work. The law is descriminrory to citizens to recieve resonable compensation and the cost of the illegal in country. It will break the bank. I do not think one govenor born by undocumented visitors is where you place your bets, as there are many citizens who are as well qualified to be govenor of any state. Poor example.
This new proposed amendment or a new interpretation of the existing amendment would create a second class of citizenship. Should a third generation US-born person be deported to a country that he or she has never been?
Julia Preston said that other states are waiting to hear the 9th Circuit Court ruling before they go ahead with their version of SB 1070. Really? Maybe Julia is in doubt about how the liberal 9th Circuit will rule, but she must be the only one. If anything, they are waiting for the SCOTUS ruling, which will probably be a 5-4 in favor of SB 1070.
Susan Paige tips her hand when she refers to SB 1070 as Arizona's "tough" immigration law. What's tough about it?
Angela Kelly said that Sen. Pete Domenici, R-N.M. was the offspring of illegal aliens. When Mark Krikorian asked if both parents were illegal, Angela replied that Domenici didn't know about his father. Really, Angela? She should apologize to Krikorain for her selective memory of the facts.
"I wish to tell about both my parents who came to this country as aliens. … They were told that my mother was a citizen once they got married because my father was a citizen. He became a citizen because he served in the First World War. He came over at the turn of the century and was drafted into the First World War." Sen. Pete Domenici, R-N.M
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2007-06-03-immigration-roots_N.htm
Gee, you think you could have had a Spanish origin person on your panel? What a radical idea. Sorry.
Mr. Krikorian clearly knows nothing about the ethnic make-up of Latin America. Latin Americans a homogeneous ethnic group? Europeans are more heterogeneous? I am Hispanic, live in a Hispanic neighborhood and ethnically I have nothing to do with most of my neighbors. What brings us Latinos together is our language and some aspects of our culture. Ethnically, we are pretty diverse!! Hispanic is NOT a race. Two people from two European countries may be ethnically closer to each other than an Argentinian is to a Mexican or a Colombian is to a Cuban.