Terror babies. Or Rosamary's Baby. They're threatening you, sez Dave Vitter (R-Fool) and others of the wingnutariat. Vitter introduced an amendment to the trafficking victims bill that would, if enacted into law, would say that all children born in the United States to have at least one parent who is either a citizen or a lawful permanent resident.
Boys at a migrant labor camp, Jan. 1942
Under Vitter's plan, for the first time since the Dredd Scott
case, birth in the United States alone would not be proof of citizenship. Yesterday, this was followed up on by Mark Krikorian, a professional anti-immigrant, and a clever and perhaps even intelligent man, who endorses
Vitter's plan, but acknowledges some difficulties:
There would be other details to work out. For instance, new federal standards for state birth certificates would be required, since the citizen or legal-resident status of the parents would have to be recorded for the Social Security Administration and the State Department to know whether to issue a Social Security number or a passport, the two practical markers of a child’s U.S. citizenship. There would probably also need to be a statute of limitations, as in Australia, so that if the child of an illegal alien or foreign student or worker lives the first ten years of his life here, he would acquire U.S. citizenship on his tenth birthday.
A rather broad level of intrusion by the Party of Small Government. "New federal standards" indeed. For the nearly 4 million births in this country, the federal bureaucracy would have to register the citizenship or immigrant status of 8 million people. What could possibly go wrong?
Worse for Krikorian, I think is that he must resort to mendacity (that's a long word for "lying") when it comes to supporting his case. He calls birthright citizenship a "custom" and a "practice", when of course it is a constitutional right.
It's also a statutory right as well, which is why Vitter's amendment would have to change the statute, section 301 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, and Krikorian refers to Vitter's amendment in his own article.
People like Krikorian and Vitter are willing to override (or attempt to override) the constitution, and impose an enormous federal bureaucracy on all of us, literally from birth, so they can foster their dream society of the neo-1950s.
Children grow up quickly and they build this country. What's the justification for this wingnut attack upon them?