Six-month-old Scarlett Alvarado Moreno, who was named for the heroine in the famous Atlanta novel 'Gone With the Wind,' is a U.S. citizen because she was born here. The baby's mother, Silvia (above), father and 4-year-old brother are not.
Posted on 09/29/2005 12:16:11 AM PDT by Hushpuppie
Silvia Moreno snuck across the U.S. border from Mexico and made it to Atlanta to join her husband last year.
When she gave birth this year, she named her daughter Scarlett, after Scarlett O'Hara.
Moreno, 26, had watched "Gone With the Wind" and was inspired by the Atlanta heroine.
"She worked so hard. She overcame adversity to survive," said Moreno, who wants her daughter to develop the same strength.
Scarlett Alvarado Moreno, 6 months, is a U.S. citizen because she was born here; her mother, father, and 4-year-old brother are illegal immigrants.
Millions of families like Scarlett's will be the focus of a hearing today before a U.S. House subcommittee in Washington to discuss birthright citizenship, dual citizenship and its effect on national sovereignty.
As President Bush opens the debate on a temporary worker program that could allow immigrant laborers to come into the United States, the issue of what happens to their children has come to the forefront.
Although revoking the birthright guarantee is not likely to be part of Congress' immigration reform agenda this fall, there are increasing signs lawmakers are thinking about altering a privilege grounded in common law and the 14th Amendment to the Constitution.
The proposals come in a post-9/11 time of increasing suspicion toward illegal immigrants. Several bills have been introduced.
Rep. Nathan Deal (R-Ga.) wants to amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to limit automatic citizenship at birth to children of U.S. citizens and lawful residents. Rep. Mark Foley (R-Fla.) introduced a constitutional amendment that also would limit birthright citizenship. Such an amendment would require ratification by three-fourths of the states.
'Anchor babies'
A proposal by Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-Colo.), who heads a 90-member caucus pushing to tighten immigration laws, would deny citizenship to U.S.-born children of temporary immigrant workers.
Tancredo said the provision is vital because temporary workers would not want to leave after their visas expire if their children are U.S. citizens, or so-called anchor babies.
Moreno, of Atlanta, thinks it's unjust to deny citizenship to children born in the United States because their parents, although illegal, work hard.
"People work so much, and they give their youth to this country," Moreno said.
Moreno wanted Scarlett to be an American because with the blue American passport, "the doors of the world are open to her," she said.
Mexicans have a harder time getting tourist visas to see the world, she said.
Dan Stein, president of the Federation for American Immigration Reform, a national group that lobbies to reduce illegal immigration, said the lure of U.S. citizenship for children is a "huge incentive" for people to come to the United States illegally because it opens the door to many social benefits.
Also, once they reach 21, the U.S.-born children of illegal immigrants can petition for their parents' residency. Family reunification often is cited as a reason for amnesty proposals.
There were 6.3 million illegal immigrant families in the United States in 2004, according to a study released in June by the Pew Hispanic Center. Most of them — 59 percent — do not have children, the study said.
But nearly one-third of families headed by illegal immigrants do have children who are U.S. citizens, the study said.
Immigrant advocates and Hispanic groups say finding work is the major motivation for illegal immigration.
"The only thing that this kind of change gets you ... is stateless people, which doesn't solve any problem," said Cecilia Munoz, vice president for policy at the National Council of La Raza, a Hispanic civil rights organization.
"This is not a matter of immigration policy, this is a matter of changing who we are fundamentally as a nation," she said.
The United States grants citizenship to every child born in the United States with the exception of children of occupying forces and foreign diplomats, who keep the citizenship of their home country, said Peter J. Spiro, an international law professor at the University of Georgia School of Law who is testifying at today's hearing.
Spiro said that proposals to change the birthright citizenship have been around since the mid-1990s, but several court decisions have upheld the citizenship.
"It's part now of our entrenched constitutional tradition that all children born in the territory of the United States are deemed citizens at birth," he said.
Ides Mercado, 19, who said she came from Honduras five years ago on a visa, warned of consequences if the birthright provision is revoked.
"There will be a lot of illegals here if they don't let the children be citizens," she said as she pushed a stroller with her 7-month-old daughter through Plaza Fiesta on Buford Highway in DeKalb County.
Daisy Montoya Becerra, 24, of Atlanta has one son born here, one son born in Mexico and another child on the way.
She's glad her younger son has U.S. citizenship.
"If he weren't a citizen, they'd take away Medicaid," she said.
She's also happy her younger son will be able to cross the border freely instead of having to slip across with a smuggler.
"With papers, he can come and go easily," she said.
Six-month-old Scarlett Alvarado Moreno, who was named for the heroine in the famous Atlanta novel 'Gone With the Wind,' is a U.S. citizen because she was born here. The baby's mother, Silvia (above), father and 4-year-old brother are not.
Agree. The only solution, unfortunately, is to fully militarize the border to prevent illegal immigration. Spend the billions to put up a real barrier, patrol it assiduously, and deport everyone caught, and put some sort of permanent mark on them so that they can never enter the US for any reason.
He was a captain of militia in the Revolutionary War. Was severely wounded by a saber cut by one of Tarleton's troopers at Guilford. After his recovery he served with Marion, The Swamp Fox.
There may still be a few in the world who do but recently Ireland did away with it, the privilege was being widely abused just as it is in this country. The voters got to decide by way of ballot, something politicians here would never allow since they know what the outcome would be.
I'm not even sure if under this system there's a mechanism for such a nationwide ballot but even if there was the politicians would never allow it. We'll have to either vote in someone like Tancredo or expect to continue getting swamped by the millions.
As relative newcomers, your family will be responsible for getting coffee when we have meetings. :-}
It's a threat. The lady is threatening the country with that remark, trying to emphasise the persistence of people from wherever she identifies with in breaking immigration laws: no citizenship for their children that illegal immigrants birth here, who cares, they'll be here and give birth anyway.
I also think her statements otherwise are offensive: people who work hard also break laws and aren't exempt from reprimand just because they work hard (I can think of many examples of criminals who work hard, and otherwise, hard working people who break laws -- one does not cancel out or prevent the other); her son because he's "legal" can "come and go" across our border/s "freely" instead of ongoing illegal activity (which she's also acknowledging, glad her son no longer has to, glad she doesn't...but the point is she's emphasizing that they're 'coming and going' without regard for any goal of citizenship in the U.S. in regards to embracing the U.S. as home and culture); and, her own enrollment in Medicaid, thanks to her son being granted citizenship by birth here to her, an illegal alien in the country.
It's generally terrible character and just being a mother/parent to anyone doesn't excuse it.
I agree that the "citizen by birthright" if/when someone is the child of illegal parents or a parent has to stop. It's the reason that many, if not most, arrive here illegally with the intention of being able to remain after giving birth, and most do that, too.
Ha, that's the thing! I read time and time again that illegal aliens are written up in media as fearing, being in pain, experiencing trauma, feeling hurt, betrayed, annoyed, outraged, desiring a better way of life, wanting good things, working hard, hardly working but there's a reason for it....
It's not a case of how they feel, one way or another, but of their actions. If you're in the country illegally, you're an illegal alien. You've violated laws and are held (or should be, lawfully) responsible for your illegal actions.
I can't run a red light on any American street intersection and be excused from accountability (or a citation and other reprimands) and responsibility for the damages I cause just because I "was working hard" and "had good intentions," or "felt hopeful" while breaking the law.
What is it that so many people from, particularly, south of the border cannot understand these concepts? Or, perhaps, are refusing to...
Well, I'm in, too, by over a century, thanks to my ancestors who brought the Monarch's business with the Virginia Company.
Yeah, but you lose sight of that founding principle in what you then allege about it.
THE PRINCIPLE IS BASED UPON LEGITIMATE PRESENCE in the Country, someone being here who does not pose an affrontive, opposing presence by being here.
Someone who creeps, steals and otherwise arrives here by ILLEGAL ACTIONS in defiance of the nation's laws IS NOT someone who is or should be included in that principle.
Our country is generous with citizenship. It's for people who seek it and go about fulfilling the requirements of it.
We DO remove certain citizenship rights from convicted felons and for these very reasons: they display character that is contrary to that to be trusted with certain citizenship rights.
So do illegal aliens.
I agree with your plan, as I believe a majority of the American people would if given a chance to vote on it. I also believe we should levy a tax on all the money that is sent abroad by immigrants via Western Union, ect. to pay for the social costs of allowing millions of poverty stricken illiterates to immigrate here. And it could help maintain the fence.
Yes, but you/yours left your country rather than stay and change it.
That's the problem with Mexico, predominantly, and many others from whence most illegal aliens originate. If the countries are so terrible, they should be changed but if the people there don't do it, why does or should the U.S. then be harmed by the problems?
The U.S. can only do so much and you can see what problems we have HERE that are difficult to solve, and yet we continue to try to do so...illegal emigration to the U.S. is not excusable to my view just because you find originating countries not to the liking. The changes have to happen by whoever is responsible in those countries, difficult, I agree, but the realistic response to the idea of the U.S. somehow going into Mexico to make it more to the liking of Mexicans in other countries.
Yeah, but the 14th Amendment remains pristine in relationship to the current problem of illegals in the country for purposes of giving birth for purposes of gaining things from the country (or otherwise).
An Amendment can be clarified by other actions, updated. That's the beauty of our Constitution...
I also think that the 14th Amendment does indicate that it's benefits don't apply to certain characters, certain presences that pose an affrontation/threat to the country.
Many people do already agree that illegal aliens fulfill just who and what the Amendment says is not to be included in it's provisions.
You just threw the racism gauntlet down. That statement (^^) combined with the denigration of the white folks you describe ("ignorant redneck") is racist, much moreso has little relevance to the issues of LEGAL AND/OR ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION UNLESS you're suggesting that "brown skinned Mexicans" should be exempt from the laws in the U.S. just because they are... You don't mention much about legal immigration and/or citizenship, by the way.
Actually, my response was a lot more curt than it would have been if your response weren't the fifth or sixth given me a great deal of guff for my posting.
I apologize for that and agree with the points you make above. Later on this thread I made a comment about testing everybody, even those born here before bestowing upon them permanent US citizenship. It is an interesting concept.
You want me to say what exactly? Would it make you feel better if I replace 'ignorant redneck' with 'idiot'? I wouldn't want to be either one and does that change my overall point at all?
You want me to say something else controversial?
Ok. It's just my personal opinion but... I believe that if our southern border was being infiltrated by say... Irishmen- then attitudes towards their illegal immigration would be somewhat different than are current attitudes towards Mexicans. That's my honest belief. You can make of that what you will. I just don't care. I was born and bred a southern white redneck and have my own first hand knowledge of the mentality. Many of my own family members fit right into the ignorant redneck/idiot profile and it doesn't bother me at all to talk about 'em so.
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.