Anchor babies and “birth tourism” making the news

The Dallas Morning News runs an intriguing report regarding the birth of anchor babies — those born to non-citizens but gifted with American citizenship — estimated between 60,000 and 65,000 last year in Texas, alone, according to a tally released by the state’s Health and Human Services Commission. Last year, such births represented almost 16 percent of the total births statewide.

A single hospital, Dallas’ Parkland Memorial, delivers more of those babies than any other hospital in the state. Last year at Parkland, 11,071 babies were born to women who were noncitizens, about 74 percent of total deliveries. Most of these women are believed to be in the country illegally. These Texas numbers alone shoot a gaping hole in the oft repeated numbers of illegals residing in the United States as approximately 12 million — a reported number that has remained stagnant for years.

Now, the issue of birthright citizenship — an inappropriate adaptation of the 14th Amendment — is getting another look by the most unlikely of people. Arizona’s own amnesty architects, Sens. John McCain and Jon Kyl, along with Sen. Lindsey Gramnesty (R-SC) have each said they intend to revisit the issue, and are looking at the advisability of a constitutional amendment that would repeal the citizenship provisions.

Texas Sen. John Cornyn is the latest senior Republican to call for a review of birthright citizenship amid complaints that illegal immigrants have abused that post-Civil War constitutional provision.

The amendment was adopted in 1868. Its intent was to allow American-born children of African-born slaves to have all of the rights and privileges of citizenship. It was necessary then, but has no relevancy today.

And widespread abuses abound. This Washington Post article tells of 90-day tourist visas selling to pregnant women for the equivalent of nearly $15,000 in China. There is a growing business of specialty resorts with maternity suites, specifically to ensure American citizenship for the newborns. Mothers from Middle Eastern nations are also coming here to deliver their babies.

In a practice known as birth tourism, millions of foreign tourists visit the United States every year, and a growing number return home with a brand new U.S. citizen in tow. The U.S. and Canada stand alone among industrialized nations to grant citizenship to all children born on its soil. No European nations grant birthright citizenship.  Only these nations do.

13 Responses to Anchor babies and “birth tourism” making the news

  1. telemoonfa says:

    Hmm… so the 14th amendment allows for anchor babies. Isn’t it also the 14th amendment that guarantees everyone the inalienable right to gay marriage?! In fact I think that “due process” and “equal protection under the law” means that everybody gets treated just the same in all cases. Who would have known in 1868 that the 14th amendment was so forward thinking?

  2. American Dad says:

    Thanks for this report on a very important subject. The continuation of the Fourteenth Amendment will be our downfall. But trusting McKyl and Gramnesty (Great names!!!) on this issue is tantamount to trusting a pedophile as a babysitter for your children.

  3. PR151 says:

    Just make all hospitals in border states into Mexican consulates.

  4. MacBeth says:

    These AZ senators and Lindsey Graham are all frauds on this topic. They have been in the forefront of amnesty for illegals from the beginning when it was called “Comprehensive Immigration Reform.” Now it goes by the name of “temporary worker program” or “guest workers “but these “guests” are akin to the ones who steal your silverware in your own dining room when your back is turned during dessert.

    In this economy when so many Americans and Arizonans are out of work and businesses are shuttered, guest workers are the last thing we need. And thanks for pointing out that when these “guests” have American born babies, they become instant citizens who are conduits for “family reunification” also known as “chain migration” allowing for the entire family from Mexico or Central America to gain access to the USA by virtue of the American born relative.

  5. Valerie J says:

    Kyl, McCain and Graham only woke up to the devestating affects of birthright citizenship 60 days preceeding Election Day. Expect them to lose interest 60 seconds after the polls close.

    Those three won’t be satisfied until North American Union is reality. They have to get reelected for that to happen.

  6. Another LD11 PC says:

    The correct solution is to ENFORCE AND SECURE THE BORDER FIRST.

    If you are looking to increasing regulations and burdens on law abiding American citizens and businesses or hospitals or whatever BEFORE the border is secure, then you are only advancing the LEFTIST agenda.

    The border must be secured FIRST, then we can talk about the rest.

    Anything that avoids securing the border FIRST must be instantly recognized for what it is and where it comes from: THE LEFT

    • AZ Conservative Guy says:

      Wow! It’s enough to think this site is read by John McCain, but that he actually posts comments on a conservative site is truly remarkable! Since he lives in LD 11, he is barely concealing his identity. This is amazing! “Secure the border first” was the giveaway, John. The only thing you omitted is the next sentence which is “before granting amnesty to the estimated 25 – 40 million living here illegally.”

      “Then we can talk about the rest?” Wow! Double Wow, Johnny Mac.

      Liberals must come here to see what the rest of us are thinking.

  7. Another LD11 PC says:

    I’m not Johnny Mac. I’m a JD supporter. My calls for securing the border first are legitimate and I’ve been saying the same thing for 10 years. So, no less than JD am I a consistent conservative.

    And when it comes to discussing policy and the right thing to do, I don’t care about the McCain divide.

    Conservatives do not increase regulations on the law abiding. They look to the root cause (border, in this case) and take care of that while REDUCING regulations and taxes, not increasing them.

    Regulations ARE taxes in that they COST MONEY to comply with and they are imposed by government.

  8. boo says:

    What is a good price for a pregnant Chinese mother to pay to keep her unborn daughter alive via a little trip to the US?

  9. Vagabond says:

    McCain is still playing the “secure the border “FIRST” crappola. Read it here:
    http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=20CE3B1F-18FE-70B2-A80A8BF427B5DCF0

    FIRST before what, Mr. McCain? Could the unspoken word be “Amnesty?“

  10. sherriaz says:

    The U.S. is the ONLY country that sells citizenship so cheaply. Even Canada doesn’t allow this anymore! Our citizenship is precious and should be treated as such.

    Birthright citizenship is not just a matter of patriotic pride, but of practicality. What is everyone in China decided to come here and have a second child? We cannot possibly accommodate the millions who would love to live here. Allowing it would destroy the very society that they admire.

    Illegals are not subject to the jurisdiction of the U.S. on a regular basis. Tourists follow our laws, but are subject to their home countries for taxation. That is the stronger standard. Illegals have broken the law to get here and that should automatically exclude their children from citizenship. Only legal residents or citizens have the right to have children that are American citizens. If one parent is an American citizen, fine, but that is not the case with most illegals.

    The Dems, quick to make a play for Hispanic votes, are deeply opposed to treating our citizenship with respect. They’d sell their own grandmothers for votes.

  11. Doc says:

    “Comprehensive Immigration Reform”…

    No, no, no. That video is actual footage. LOOK at how these people act, yet demand that we GIVE THEM/their @$$0ciates amnesty/Liberty/a pass/whatever. Nope. I don’t believe that’s a good idea.

    I’ve got a better idea. If a man or woman is found to be in Arizona or America ILLEGALLY, then their future involves arrest & deportation. Pretty simple. It’s NOT personal, & “race” has nothing what so ever to do with it. There’s all sorts of ethnicities that are here illegally besides Mexicans. I’m pretty sure that Arizona SB1070 applies to ANYBODY that’s here illegally. Evidently the Mexicans, who are so against America protecting her boarders, are A.D.H.D., & can’t stay focused on the actual topic.

    No, we’re NOT supporting illegals in our prisons, i.e.: 3 hots & a cot. If an illegal alien, no matter where they are from, has broken our laws in other ways, he/she’ll do time for THAT, THEN it’s off to whichever boarder/airport with them.

    To make this a “race/ethnicity” issue is merely an attempt to subvert the actual topic. I know a South African national who is a naturalized American citizen. BUT she was here ILLEGALLY FOR Y E A R S before getting her naturalization completed. She’s now a LEGAL naturalized American citizen, as liberal as she can possibly be, & thinks Obama is the greatest thing since sliced bread, which is her earned right.

    I know a Canadian national as well. He came here on a visa which he stayed on top of, started the naturalization process legally, did all the same stuff the South African eventually also did (except be here illegally) & is now a naturalized American citizen, & one of the most staunch conservatives I know, which is his earned right.

    You do the math.

    And please don’t whine about “breaking up families”. Many illegal aliens CAME HERE, KNOWING they were breaking the law, & had babies who are now citizens under our Constitution. I don’t like it, but that’s a FACT. I pity the babies, not the illegal alien parent(s). However there are plenty of American households who would be more than happy to raise these children. OR-IF we can get our U.S. Representatives to actually DO SOMETHING, maybe we can amend the Constitution. Either way, the illegal alien parent(s) who knowingly broke our laws FIRST THING when they got here receive…arrest & deportation. Take your American citizen babies with you if you want. Or don’t. Whichever. Again, so simple.

    “Oh, we can’t possibly deport every illegal (immigrant) alien…” Uuuuhhh YES, WE MOST CERTAINLY CAN. AND, that would put many out of work Americans back to work. For example, Boarder Patrol officers to guard our boarders. I.N.S. officers to locate & arrest the illegals.(no matter what color their skin is!) Workers to document these people before they leave. Detention officers to guard them. Bus drivers to get them to the boarder or port of EXIT. People to maintain the buses. On&on&on&on.

    I wonder if the muslims that wanna’ build a ‘mosque’ 2 blocks from Ground Zero in Manhatten are here illegally?

    …just sayin’…

  12. Texas Drifter says:

    Submitted by John R. Marshall, Editor Marshall’s Law Townhall for Texas Drifter

    Subject Question: Past anchor babies protected by ex post facto?

    Subject response for possible Marshall’s Law Townhall posting by Texas Drifter
    (Google Marshall’s Law Townhall for reference site).

    Question 1: Does Article I Section 9 “No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto law shall be passed.”

    Question 2: When Legislature changes anchor baby policies, can it include pre-legislation anchor babies?

    Question 3.Does ex post facto extend to “unconstitutional practices” never challenged in any court?

    Three problems need to be addressed: 1) stopping current anchor babies invasion 2) deporting previous born anchor babies and 3) lettting only those who support anchor babies staying pay for all anchor babies expenses – doubling income taxes for anchor babies should be good start. So says Texas Drifter

    http://Marshall'sLawTownhall
    Editor Marshall’s Law Townhall