Anchor Babies and Jeb Bush on Trial in Texas

The First Lady of the Conservative Movement, and our longtime friend, Phyllis Schlafly has posted an excellent article on Townhall explaining that a federal case moving to trial in Texas could provide a means to stop the practice of extending automatic U.S. citizenship to children born to illegal aliens.

Jeb BushRepublican presidential candidate Donald Trump recently called for legislation to end that unpopular practice, which polls show Americans oppose by more than 2 to 1, and even Jeb Bush admitted that it’s perfectly legitimate to call those children "anchor babies."

The Pew Research Center estimated that 340,000 children are born annually to citizens of Mexico and other foreign countries who are living illegally in the United States, and that doesn’t include children born to "birth tourists," primarily from Asian countries, which the Center for Immigration Studies estimates could be as high as 36,000. These children are called "anchor babies" because their presumed citizenship enables their parents to access a variety of benefit programs intended for U.S. citizens, and makes it so much easier for the entire family to continue living here illegally.

The Texas case is still in its pretrial stage, but Mrs. Schlafly explains that an explosive document filed there last week by the government of Mexico adds fuel to the national debate that Trump touched off. The legal brief, which includes a sworn affidavit by Mexico’s consul general for Texas, Carlos Gonzalez Gutierrez, openly admits that Mexico’s official policy is to encourage its poor people to migrate here illegally in order to access our generous welfare system.

The brief begins by declaring that "Mexico is responsible to protect its nationals wherever they may be residing," and a footnote clarifies that under the Mexican Constitution, "Mexican nationality is granted to children born abroad of a Mexican born parent." In other words, anchor babies born in this country retain their parents’ nationality, which means their citizenship belongs there, not here.

Liberals claim that our own Constitution guarantees automatic U.S. citizenship to all children born on American soil, and it’s true that the Fourteenth Amendment begins with the words "All persons born or naturalized in the United States . . . are citizens of the United States." But behind those three little dots is an important qualification: "AND subject to the jurisdiction thereof."

What that forgotten phrase means is that when someone born here is "subject to the jurisdiction" of another nation, that child does not become a U.S. citizen unless the laws passed by Congress so provide (and they don’t).

By filing its legal brief and submitting sworn testimony in the Texas case, says Schlafly, Mexico is officially declaring that children born to its citizens living illegally in the United States remain "subject to the jurisdiction" of Mexico.

The Mexican consul, in his sworn testimony, says that "My responsibilities in this position include protecting the rights and promoting the interests of my fellow Mexican nationals" and "The main responsibility of consulates is to provide services, assistance, and protection to nationals abroad."

Mexico’s assertion of continuing jurisdiction over its "nationals abroad," observes Schlafly, is inconsistent with any claim to automatic U.S. citizenship merely by reason of birth on U.S. soil.

The Texas case was filed on behalf of about two dozen mothers who admit they are citizens of Mexico living illegally in Texas. The women complain that without proper ID they cannot get birth certificates for their Texas-born children, and that without birth certificates they can’t enroll in Medicaid, food stamps, Section 8 housing, and other U.S. taxpayer-provided benefits.

Like other states, Texas issues a birth certificate to a close relative only upon presentation of a valid ID issued by a U.S. federal or state agency. These restrictions were adopted to combat the growing epidemic of identity theft, whose main cause is the widespread use of forged or fake documents by illegal aliens.

In order to assist its citizens living here illegally who cannot get the required ID, Mexican consulates issue an official-looking document called the matricula consular which includes a laminated photo. Of course, Texas rightly refuses to accept such foreign identity documents which it has no way to verify.

The basic allegation of the lawsuit is that by refusing to accept the matricula consular as proper ID for obtaining a birth certificate, Texas is somehow violating the Fourteenth Amendment by depriving anchor babies of U.S. citizenship.

On the contrary, says attorney Phyllis Schlafly, their reliance on a foreign identity document proves they are "subject to the jurisdiction" of a foreign power and thus not eligible for automatic U.S. citizenship.

The Texas lawsuit was concocted by a group called the South Texas Civil Rights Project, which was founded in 1972 as a spin-off of the ACLU. It was assisted by another leftwing legal outfit, Texas RioGrande Legal Aid, whose largest supporter, the Legal Services Corporation, collected $375 million of U.S. taxpayer funds in the current fiscal year observed Mrs. Schlafly.

We think Donald Trump has a knack for getting right to the heart of establishment Republican hypocrisy, and especially Jeb Bush hypocrisy, and his point about Bush differentiating between Asian anchor babies and Hispanic anchor babies is right on target, because there is no differentiation – they are both subject to the jurisdiction of a foreign nation.

As Mrs. Schlafly so cogently explained, wealthy Asians, particularly Chinese, and poor Latin Americans make a point of having children in the United States for the same reason; to access the benefits American citizenship confers upon their children.

So Jeb Bush’s distinction between the two groups makes no sense, logically. But it does prove a point we’ve made before. And that is that Jeb is a “gringo aplatanado,” or American who has “gone native” and adopted Latin American culture as his own.

From identifying himself as “Hispanic” on a voter registration form, to his refusal to acknowledge that the same argument against granting birthright citizenship to the offspring of birth-tourists applies to the offspring of illegal aliens, Jeb Bush just can’t bring himself to fight for the sovereignty of the United States, the quality of life of America’s hard-pressed working citizens and the preservation of American exceptionalism.

Mind reading is not your skill.

The reason you fix the legal immigration process is to gain political support for all of the other elements of fixing the ILLEGAL immigration problem.

It also has the benefit of stifling the charges of racism.

But, you seem to prefer to shout about keeping them all out, while nothing changes.

The reason you fix the legal immigration process is to gain political support for all of the other elements of fixing the ILLEGAL immigration problem.

What is wrong with the current legal immigration system that YOU want to fix?

But, you seem to prefer to shout about keeping them all out, while nothing changes.

Where have I said that? I said we must drastically reduce the number of legal immigrants from the current 1.1 million a year. I also want to see a major reduction in guest workers who total 640,000 a year.

You keep going in circles. What exactly does privatization do to improve the legal immigration process? Be specific. You talk about efficiency. But what impact does that have on immigration caps in the various categories and the overall number of legal immigrants we admit annually?

There are four million intending immigrants waiting their turn overseas. They have completed all the paperwork. They can't get in due to the caps on numbers in various categories. How does efficiency help them?

You’re catching on.

A private contractor would not be subject to Executive Orders from the next lib or Rino.

The caps are set by Congress.

Meanwhile we’ve neutered another bloated gov’t agency and replaced it with a more cost effective company.

So how does the private contractor conduct security and background checks? Who provides oversight of the contractor?

Of course the contractor would be subject to executive orders. Who does the contractor work for?

So what agency is eliminated under your scheme?

There are so many unanswered questions with your nonsensical "sol;ution." You have no idea how the immigration process works in government. I do.

oooohh...you’re an immigration expert....!!!

I guess that disqualifies FReepers from presenting bulletized outlines, because they don’t include a thousand pages of policy?

Grow up!

The immigration process is broken and its run by a bunch of unmotivated, unionized government workers, with oversight by an administration who doesn’t want it improved because they’re quite happy with the excuse for more ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION.

So, get off of your high horse and focus on the bigger risk in front of us.

oooohh...you’re an immigration expert....!!!

Yes, I have spent over 8 years learning about the issue and on the front lines of fighting for policies and changes at both the federal and state levels. It is strictly voluntary and I get no pay for it. Just some money to cover various expenses incurred on behalf of the organization.

I guess that disqualifies FReepers from presenting bulletized outlines, because they don’t include a thousand pages of policy?

I am trying to educate you and others about the issue. It is truly amazing how little people know about it. We had a booth at CPAC for four years and were surprised at how ill-informed even conservative activists were about immigration. The vast majority didn't even know how many legal permanent immigrants we admit annually. Most of the time they guessed between 10 thousand to 50 thousand. They were blown away when they found out it was 1.1 million (1.7 million this year).

There you go again. What about the immigration process is broken? What is the connection to illegal immigration?

So, get off of your high horse and focus on the bigger risk in front of us.

What is the "bigger" risk? You need to get better informed about the issue. We can only go around this tree so often. Wallow in your own ignorance. I will move on.

You seem incapable of comprehending the impact of the first 5 points of my plan for purposes of blowing your own horn.

Refuse to be dragged into the debate on the 14th Amendment, and instead present your plan to make it irrelevant.

1. Build the Wall.
2. Enforce E-Verify (means fining violating employers)
3. Enforce the Border.
4. Deport the Criminals.
5. Stop providing taxpayer benefits to illegals.

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.