Welcome to the office of Congressman Nathan Deal, representing Georgia’s 10th Congressional District in the United States House of Representatives.
“By granting the child citizenship, that child then is able, down the road, as he becomes an adult, to legally make the parents citizens of this country as well,” said Rep. Nathan Deal, R-Ga.
It should not surprise anyone that Congressman Deal has a solid grasp of the
14th amendment.
What is surprising, however, is that he would then propose legislation that is so constitutionally problematic. The problem seems to stem from the line “subject to the jurisdiction thereof”. Cong. Deal seems to indicate (at least to
FOX News) that there
is a Strict Constructionist approach that can really help our Nation with its Illegal Immigrant problem.
“If you look at the original debate of that amendment in the Congress, it was obviously not intended to give carte blanche birthright citizenship to anyone who happened to be born on American soil,” Deal said.
Now here’s the thing: It says quite clearly that all persons born on U.S. soil are citizens. It’s in the first sentence. When the 14th amendment was passed the modern idea of illegal immigrants was not something they were dealing with. The jurisdiction line in the amendment allows people who are not US citizens to not have their children made U.S. citizens if they don’t want them to be. It also allows somewhat sticky problems of tourists and visitors to not have to worry about the U.S.A appropriating their children.
Illegal immigrants are “subject to the jurisdiction” of the U.S.A. and while their parents nation may still have a claim to them they may not. This law could have some interesting ramifications for refugees and others of questionable legal status within the U.S. It also opens the door for revocation of citizenship for these “Anchor Children”. I suspect that Cong. Deal is simply looking for a way to make his constituents happy and has found a group that is pretty much defenseless and that no-one in their right mind would spend political capital to defend. The problem with Illegal immigration is much like the problem with drugs: there is still a substantial economic incentive for it.
Legislation will not change the economic realities that are there. Neither will enforcement unless enforcement can be made 100% and nearly instantaneous. If these jokers really wanted to do something about illegal immigrants, they should simply make it the penalty for hiring an illegal immigrant the loss of
charter. I can guarantee you that if those who hired illegal immigrants faced the loss of their corporate charter that background checks would suddenly become the norm and the economic incentive of coming to the U.S. would evaporate like a morning fog.
Footnote: I realize that it is somewhat ironic in these times of “Activist Judges” to note that it was the Supreme Court in 1886 (see the Charter link above) that made corporations into people in the first place, complicating a “death penalty” proposition like I make. It is, however, well within legislative power to make a law like this, especially given the commerce clause to make such laws given the evident inter-state nature of immigration policy.