Korean Job Discussion Forums

[BigBlackEquus]

Korean parents won't be happy if this one goes through. Just one more blow against them flying to the USA to have a baby.

http://www.washtimes.com/national/20051103-115741-1048r.htm

" Birthright citizenship, or what critics call "anchor babies," means that any child born on U.S. soil is granted citizenship, with exceptions for foreign diplomats. That attracts illegal aliens, who have children in the United States; those children later can sponsor their parents for legal immigration. "

[mindmetoo]

They'd have to change the constitution. The amendment was written into the constitution in response to slavery, as a guard against future slavery. If you're born in America, you are an American and have all the rights of a citizen. Your skin color or parent's nationality doesn't matter. Free speech can be abused as well, but it doesn't mean you get rid of the First Amendment.

[Ya-ta Boy]

[Gord]

[nicknack]

Wow. Gord is smart.

[Manner of Speaking]

There are easier ways of approaching the issue, IMHO. When the woman arrives at the airport (and is obviously pregnant), they could have her sign a form/affidavit verifying that she is not here to have the kid obtain US citizenship. If she refuses to sign, they deny her entry.

Even better, have her sign a form so that if she does have the child while she's in the country, that she can't take it home and must put it up for adoption while she's in the US. That should put the brakes on things pretty quickly.

[wannago]

The real problem, as BBE said, is the illegal aliens. I think this is a great idea. The constitution, on this issue, is long overdue for a change. This is much the same as the Electoral College needing to be changed as well.

The whole argument comparing free speech to this is ridiculous. Just because your mother was sneaky enough to make it to U.S. soil to pop you out shouldn't afford you the rights of citizenship. If at least one of your parents is a U.S. citizen, great...you're in. If not and you want to become a citizen, try going the naturalization route.

[lastat06513]

The main reasons for having a baby in the US or any English speaking country for that matter are;

1. If the baby is male, he is exempted from doing mandatory military service because Korean laws forbid foreign nationals from serving in the Korean Armed Forces (though that is changing). Also, alot of foreign countries have laws that forbid their nationals from being pressed into service of another country (example- The War of 1812)

2. If the baby is born in another country and is eligible for a foreign passport, he/she is eligible to enter college or university as a foreign student and is exempted from submitting a CSAT score.

3. In the case in some US cities, if a child is a citizen, he is eligible to enter the city's public school system without taking mandatory remedial classes like beginning English and Math.


Another idea would be for the US to enact a kind of "foreign service" corp in the army. To have all foreign nationals who were born in the US (men and women) perform translator duty for the military for a period of 2 years. After which they get to keep their citizenship and also obtain the same benefits of a veteran.

I am not saying I support this, I am just tossing it out as an idea.

[The Bobster]

[Kuros]

[wannago]

[Bulsajo]

The explicit reason for the proposed bill is curbing illegal immigration.
So, would people whose parents entered the US legally (e.g. Koreans on a tourist visa) and who are born in the US still get birthright citizenship?
That's not clear in the article.

Anyway seems like a non-issue. So what if they do away with birthright citizenship? Then citizenship would depend on the status of the parents, right? As long as one of your parents is an American citizen you can get US citizenship regardless of where you're born, is that correct?

The only problem I could see where a child of two non-citizens (on long term work or study visas, etc.) is born and raised in the US and doesn't have US citizenship. This occurs (or perhaps used to occur- I'm not current) among Turkish long-term 'guest-workers' in Germany, and I recall a case where a man in a similar situation in Canada was deported to Jamaica after serving a criminal sentence. He'd been born and raised in Canada but didn't have citizenship. I guess it's a question of whether the law in Canada and Germany meets a 'fairness' benchmark from a human rights standpoint; pretty good arguments both ways.

What's the good argument for keeping the birthright citizenship? Constitutional? Human rights?

[The Bobster]

[Ya-ta Boy]

[wannago]