Posted on 11/01/2018 2:16:29 PM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer
The number of babies born to unauthorized immigrant parents in the U.S. fell to 250,000 in 2016, the lowest figure since 2000, according to a new Pew Research Center report published Thursday afternoon. Such births have decreased 36 percent since hitting a peak of about 390,000 in 2007, the researchers said.
The new data comes as President Trump is focusing new attention on the issue by vowing to eliminate birthright citizenship, the constitutional provision that children born in the U.S. are automatically American citizens.
Children born to undocumented immigrants accounted for 6 percent of the 4 million births in the U.S. in 2016, the Pew Research Center estimated, based on data from the U.S. Census Bureau. In total, about 5 million U.S.-born children under age 18 were living with at least one unauthorized immigrant parent, Pew said.
(Excerpt) Read more at cbsnews.com ...
Don’t worry darlings, soothed the SeeBSGrinch, everything will be alright....musn’t worry your pretty little heads, he hissed...
Not nearly low enough. Should be ZERO!....................
Right on time. Fake News. Predictably boring.
Yawn.
MAGA
PS
Isn’t the Pew Research Center (formerly the Pew Hispanic Center, but they ditched the controversial name) the same gang that’s been tellin’ us the “undocumented” population was only 11 million for, oh, 20 years now?
But now the Yale study says it’s 22 - 30 million, just like we all thought?
Headline is misleading - - There have been about 300,000 anchor babies born in the US each year for the last 10 yeats.
That equals the population of Pittsburg, PA Every Damned Year!
One is too many. Does that include birth tourists?
If they are undocumented, how do they know?
“The author of the Civil Rights Act of 1866 was Senator Lyman Trumbull.”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Rights_Act_of_1866
The Civil Rights Act of 1866
“Be it enacted...That all persons born in the United States and not subject to any foreign power, excluding Indians not taxed, are hereby declared to be citizens of the United States”
....
http://teachingamericanhistory.org/library/document/the-civil-rights-act-of-1866/
“Of course my opinion is not any better than that of any other member of the Senate; but it is very clear to me that there is nothing whatever in the suggestions of the Senator from Wisconsin. The provision is, that “ all persons born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens.” That means “subject to the complete jurisdiction thereof.” Now, does the Senator from Wisconsin pretend to say that the Navajo Indians are subject to the Complete jurisdiction of the United States? What do we mean by “subject to the jurisdiction of the United States?” Not owing allegiance to anybody else. That is what it means. [emphases added] Can you sue a Navajo Indian in court? Are they in any sense subject to the complete jurisdiction of the United States? By no means.”
— Senator Lyman Trumbull, Congressional Globe, 1774 - 1875 Congressional Globe, Senate, 39th Congress, 1st Session. (See middle of first column.)
http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=llcg&fileName=073/llcg073.db&recNum=14
One certainly couldn’t tell by the births at the hospital where I work... unless the 1/3 - 1/2 or sometimes more of all the infants we register which are no ingles hispanics are legal residents or citizens. And we’re in the state capital of a very red state, not a rural or farm community or a sanctuary city (AFAIK)
I read this from Lucianne.com
Seems to me that ending birthright citizenship should be easy. The 14th amendment´s language includes: “ and subject to the jurisdiction thereof”...
All congress has to do is pass a law that defines “ and subject to the jurisdiction thereof” to mean that unless you´re a citizen or in the country legally, the jurisdiction clause doesn´t apply to you. Then explicitly state that at least one of the birth parents need to be in the country legally or citizenship isn´t conveyed.
30,000 illegal births during the Reagan years sounds great now
Quite.
The damage along many of our southern communities is substantial. Recently caught a factoid on either the radio or printed press that 50% of the births at many hospitals in Southern California are children of illegal immigrant parents.
As a native Californian who over several decades watched the state and feds sit on their hands re the matter, it became obvious it was the result of a coordinated political agenda.
It is the macro of the sidewalks in SF and there are certainly those who are pleased about it.
And, it's not just the left, it includes all but a handful of the R's.
“If they are undocumented, how do they know?”
That is an interesting question. Do we have a data base of illegals?
I thought they were Foreign National Invaders?
Re: “If they are undocumented, how do they know?”
Because ALL pregnancies and ALL births in the USA are potentially covered under Medicaid - to protect the child.
The hospital might ask for a Social Security number, but the illegals know they do not need one, so they don’t even try to fake it.
They just say, “I don’t have enough money to pay for this,” and that pretty much closes the deal.
Does that mean we need more illegals?
Isn’t this a convenient “fact” just before the elections when border security and caravans are big in the news.
Off topic here but, this is the Dention Facility website for Spartanburg SC.
Click on the Spanish names and notice the race of the inmate.
http://www.spartanburgsheriff.org/bookings/jailrostera.xml
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.