Implications of America S Decision to Put an End to Birthright or Citizenship
America is a country whose constructs were founded by slaves and immigrants during the early stages of industrialization. However, leaders have recently laid great emphasis on closing America’s doors to new migrants, and to deport those who are already within the boundaries of the U.S. For the most part, relinquishing birthright citizenship is unconstitutional under the provisions of the 14th Amendment (Noferi). Similarly, giving the federal government the power to terminate citizenship is akin to placing the citizenship rights of Americans on the hands of others as opposed to the Constitution(Ford). As if not enough, deporting citizens is un-American and it also deprives the country of the much-needed expertise that foreigners have to offer. Therefore, terminating birthright or citizenship is unwise, unconstitutional, and a departure from the founding values of America.
As mentioned earlier, legislators are erecting numerous bills to try and deny children born in the U.S. their birthright. In 2009, Representative Nathan Deal came up with the Birthright Citizenship Act, which would prevent children born to immigrants in the U.S. from acquiring birthright citizenship. As much as there is a heated debate over the issue, no one is really considering the 14th Amendment. According to the laws under this amendment, any person who is born on U.S. soil automatically becomes an American citizen (Ho et al.: Noferi). Therefore, by neglecting the 14th Amendment, legislators in America are not only sidelining a significant element of their judiciary, but they are also setting a bad precedent on the interpretations of laws in the state. Furthermore, this means that children who are born to illegal immigrants in the U.S. will be denied American citizenship. Therefore, birthright citizenship should not be terminated because it is in direct violation of the 14th Amendment of the American Constitution.
Additionally, the 14th Amendment allows for the acquisition of U.S. citizenship through naturalization. This implies that anybody who has resided in the U.S. for a period of more than five years has the right to acquire citizenship through naturalization (“”History.com””). In the recent times, however, this channel has been reinforced and applicants must meet the requirements outlined by the Congress in the Immigration and Nationality Act. Should citizenship through naturalization be abolished, this will be a departure from democracy because it gives the federal government much power over sensitive matters such as the citizenship of Americans. At one time, Justice Hugo Black stated that, “”The very nature of our free government makes it completely incongruous to have a rule of law under which a group of citizens temporarily in office can deprive another group of citizens of their citizenship”” (Ford). Therefore, the dismissal of American citizenship is not only unconstitutional but it also represents a non-American way of handling issues.
From a moral and ethical viewpoint, abolishing birthrights or citizenship is in direct contrast with the founding values of the United States, which have been adopted by the judiciary system of many countries. As such, America is a country that was molded to its current form through the efforts of slaves and immigrants (“”Forbes””). Now that the country is the leading economy of the world, it is unfortunate that its proprietors desire to chase the same people who helped build it. For the most part, this might weaken the social and political integration between America and other countries. By far, these actions mimic injustice to migrants, and portrays America as a selfish country. In doing so, America will also be preventing the future entry of other migrants. Surprisingly, the congressional debates are rarely steered to recognize the professional contribution of immigrants, although it is significant. Therefore, by deporting immigrants from America, the state might lose some of its most valued expertise, which has placed it at the helm of global politics.
Therefore, putting an end to birthright and citizenship is unconstitutional as stipulated by the 14th Amendment. Furthermore, America has always been known as an accommodating country that was founded through the resilient actions of immigrants. Therefore, terminating birthright and citizenship paints the state in a bad image and sets an equally unsatisfactory precedent for other countries that look up to the United States. Brain draining might jeopardize America’s economic position as the best in the world. Perhaps, countries that recognize the contributing efforts of immigrants and open their borders to them will rise to become the hallmark of democracy and economic stability in the world.
“”14th Amendement Adopted.”” History.com. This Day in History, 2018. Web. 4 Apr. 2018.
Ford, Matt. “”Will the Supreme Court Defend Citizenship?”” The Atlantic, 2 May 2017. Web. 4 Apr. 2018.
Ho, James, Margaret Stock, Eric Ward & Elizabeth Wydra. “”Made in America: Myths & Facts about Birthright Citizenship.”” American Immigration Council. Immigration Policy Center, Sep. 2009. Web. 4 Apr. 2018.
Noferi, Mark. “”Ending Birthright Citizenship: (Still) Unconstitutional, Unwise, Unworkable, and Un-American.”” Immigration Impact. America Immigration Council, 28 Apr. 2015. Web. 4 Apr. 2018.
“”The Chinese Helped Build America.”” Forbes. Forbes Asia, 12 May 2014. Web. 4 Apr. 2018.