The actual definition of an anchor baby is a term used to refer to a child born to a non-citizen mother in a country that has birthright citizenship which will therefore help the mother and other family members gain legal residency. It is a practice to get the child citizenship by birth so the parents can gain an advantage to their green cards without waiting in line for the naturalization process.
Chief Justice Morrison Waite, in the statement you wrote, was only describing children of those born to US citizens, not to those born of non-citizens on US sanctuary and he demised in 1888 before the 14th Amendment was written as the case you quoted, Minor v Happersett, was determine in 1875. Additionally, the US supreme court handed down its landmark Dred Scott ruling in 1857, declaring that no African American, whether free or enslaved, could be an American citizen. It is possible, however, that these cases were a major push to writing the 14th Amendment to clarify US birth right in 1868 as slaves needed to be qualified to be citizens if they were born here. And the anchor baby problem falls right into the determination as written.
The 14th amendment to the Constitution reads:
“All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and the State wherein they reside.”
There are no sub-entries as it does not limit the citizen status in any way as it legally applies both federal and state citizenship, in full.
Trump has already signed an executive order to stop the practice, but it is in the court system as we speak and due to the 14th amendment being used inconsistent with it’s intent, but legally, it won’t stand and is not in effect as we speak.
A measure pending in Congress would change the Constitution to deny citizenship rights to babies born to illegal immigrants. The proposed amendment is currently given little or no chance of passage but it certainly helps to focus attention on the nature of the problem.
But, in the meantime, and consistent with the 14th amendment, anchor babies, just be being birthed on US soil, have all the rights and privileges awarded to US citizen parents.
As for the privilege of running for president, Obama was a perfect example as his father was a foreign national and his mother was a US citizen. But as she resided outside the US territories for more than the length of time, 5 years, to make Barrack an automatic citizen he needed to be born on US soil in Hawaii, whether he was or not. Hence the question of his birth certificate.
rwood
Not according to Mark Levin.
anchor babies, just be being birthed on US soil, have all the rights and privileges awarded to US citizen parents.
Except to become the President.
As for the privilege of running for president, Obama was a perfect example as his father was a foreign national
That's a disqualifier right there.
But as she (Stanley) resided outside the US territories for more than the length of time, 5 years, to make Barrack an automatic citizen
She wasn't old enough for that to happen.
The Kenyan claimed he was born there. So did Mike....and his grandmother.