Friday, June 5, 2009

Anchor Babies and Fourteenth Amendment

From Mark Alexander's Patriot Post:

Patriot reader and Harding University political science professor Cheri Pierson
Yecke wrote in to clear up the matter. She noted that birthright citizenship
"began with the Supreme Court decision of United States v. Wong Kim Ark (1898).
SCOTUS shamefully ignored congressional intent and gave the following opinion:
'A child born in the United States, of parents of Chinese descent, who, at the
time of his birth, are subjects of the Emperor of China, but have a permanent
domicile and residence in the United States, and are there carrying on business,
and are not employed in any diplomatic or official capacity under the Emperor of
China, becomes at the time of his birth a citizen of the United States, by
virtue of the first clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution: "All
persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the
jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein
they reside."'"

Dr. Yecke added, "As can be seen in the Senate debate on the 14th Amendment
(39th Congress, First Session), a provision for 'anchor babies' was never the
intent of Congress." Sen. Jacob Howard (R-MI) argued for adding the phrase
"subject to the jurisdiction thereof" to the Amendment, saying, "This
[Amendment] will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who
are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors, or foreign
ministers..."

No comments: