On ‘anchor babies’ and citizenship

June

Patrick Young, who teaches immigration law at Hofstra and advises the Westchester Hispanic Coalition, deconstructs the notion of “anchor babies” today on the blog Long Island Wins. It’s part of his “Immigration 101” series on policy.

Anchor babies are a disparaging reference to the U.S.-born children of illegal immigrants, who presumably help their parents lay claim to a life in the United States. (Note that a U.S. citizen child only becomes eligible to petition for a parent when they turn 21. And if the child’s parent faces deportation, there are few exceptions based on hardship.) (“Anchor baby” is one of the insults that appeared in the online forums about the Brewster students, as discussed in the previous post.) Anyway, there have been calls in Congress to do away with automatic citizenship at birth, and questions about the 14th Amendment’s true meaning. Young responds to a discussion by FAIR, which says such families have a divided allegiance and that the Supreme Court has never considered this issue. Young writes,

Now, I’m guessing it would be pretty hard to gauge “the allegiance” of any newborn. And “this issue has never been directly decided by the U.S. Supreme Court” because it is so darned stupid.

Meanwhile, a discussion tonight at Baruch Conference Center will look at citizenship and immigration from a not-so-legally-minded perspective. Titled “Who Gets a Voice? Immigrants and Civic Inclusion” it will look at how the undocumented can “be engaged in civic life in a way that strengthens the social fabric of our country.” Sponsors are Demos and the World Policy Institute.

This entry was posted on Tuesday, June 30th, 2009 at 1:27 pm by Leah Rae.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
|

4 Responses to “On ‘anchor babies’ and citizenship”

zeezil July 1st, 2009 at 6:45 am
The Forgotten Issue: Illegal Immigration and Crime

Two new studies were released in October on the relationship between illegal immigrants and crime in the U.S. The first released October 1, 2008, by the Center for Immigration Studies deals with gang activity, and the second, released October 3, 2008, by the Maricopa County Attorneys Office in Phoenix, Arizona, details the percentage of crimes committed by border violators in the third largest county in the U.S.

“Taking Back the Streets: ICE and Local Law Enforcement Target Immigrant Gangs” is the Center for Immigration Studies report that offers these highlights:
1. Transnational immigrant gangs have been spreading rapidly and sprouting in suburban and rural areas where communities are not always equipped to deal with them.
2. A very large share of immigrant gang members are illegal aliens and removable aliens. Federal sources estimate that 60 to 90 percent of the members of MS-13, the most notorious immigrant gang, are illegal aliens. In one jurisdiction studied, Northern Virginia, 30 to 40 percent of the gang task force case load were removable aliens.
3. MS-13 activity was found in 48 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico.
4. The immigrant gangsters arrested were a significant menace to the public. About 80 percent had committed serious crimes in addition to their immigration violations and 40 percent were violent criminals.
5. While immigration law enforcement is a federal responsibility, ICE cannot do the job effectively without assistance from state and local law enforcement, particularly when it comes to immigrant gangs.
6. Failure to adequately control the U.S.-Mexico border and to deter illegal settlement in general undermines the progress ICE and local law enforcement agencies have made in disrupting criminal immigrant street gangs.
For full report, see: http://www.cis.org/ImmigrantGangs

For VIDEO summary of the report: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WTRvXYuBgYQ&eurl=http://www.cis.org/ImmigrantGangsVideo

The MCAO report from County Attorney Andrew Thomas features these startling numbers for prosecuted felony cases in Maricopa County, Arizona:

In 2007, illegal immigrants accounted for:

10% of sex crimes convictions
11% of murders convictions
13% of stolen cars convictions
13% of aggravated assaults convictions
17% of those sentenced for violent crimes
19% of those sentenced for property crimes
20% of those sentenced for felony DUI.
21% of crimes committed with weapons
34% of those sentenced for the manufacture, sale or transport of drugs
36% of those sentenced for kidnapping
44% of forgeries
50% of those sentenced for crimes related to “chop shops”
85% of false ID convictions
96% of smuggling convictions

Illegal immigrants make up 19 percent of those convicted of crimes in Maricopa County and 21 percent of those in county jails.

Illegal immigrants only make up an estimated 9 percent of the county’s population.

It is estimated that each violent crime cost citizens $20,000, and each property crime cost citizens $4363 per offense.

All the more a concern is research that finds the likelihood of an illegal immigrant being incarcerated grows with longer residence in the United States and that the U.S. born children (considered citizens) of illegal immigrants are dramatically more likely to be involved in crime than their illegal immigrant parents. For instance, native born Hispanic male high school dropouts are eleven times more likely to be incarcerated than their foreign born counterparts.
BULLDOG July 1st, 2009 at 8:55 am
“The supreme court has never considered this issue” because
we have never had an immigration mess like we have now. It
needs to be changed so that ANCHOR BABIES do not get automatic citizenship. Anchor baby is not an insult it’s the
truth.
Steve C. July 1st, 2009 at 10:25 am
Its where you are born and raised and how your are raised.
if someone is born in england because of a vacation or something and grows up their whole life in australia. They are australian.

What I think should happen is this:
If a child is born in a country by parents who are not citizens of tat countr, then that child needs to go back to the parents country of residence with the parent. But in the books the child should be given the right later on to re-patriate back to the country of his/her birth.

I think that would fix it all. And if by some miracle the parents arent caught and remain in this country then they should learn the language of the country they are hiding out in.
Lulu July 10th, 2009 at 8:37 pm
I do not see how the term “anchor baby” can be deemed racist. It describes a practice by illegal immigrants to “anchor” their families in the U.S. by giving birth to a child on U.S. soil, something that automatically confers citizenship on a child born to illegals. Further, how can anyone not see why people are upset about an article on the accomplishments of immigrant students. We live in a small community that has been overrun by illegal immigrants, our primary schools have dedicated classes and teachers to educate those illegal immigrants’ children (meaning the classes are populated by only one group), our ERs are inundated with undocumented people, our social services are overwhelmed, our crime rate is rising. Meanwhile, our taxes keep escalating, our quality of life continues to erode, and we’re all supposed to be just dandy about their academic accomplishments obtained on our collective sweat and toil. I am a compassionate, liberal voter but I draw the line at illegal immigration. I want people to respect our laws and treat us fairly. I’ll be rooting for those immigrants who do.

It is a condition of your use of the comment features associated with the blogs that you do not: Use the site to post or transmit any unlawful, threatening, abusive, libelous, defamatory, obscene, vulgar, pornographic, profane or indecent information of any kind, including without limitation any transmissions constituting or encouraging conduct that would constitute a criminal offense, give rise to civil liability or otherwise violate any local, state, national or international law. You alone are responsible for the material you post or send. Refer to the Terms of Service.