The Pros and Cons of Anchor Babies - Coursework Example

Anchor Babies Introduction Several works have been rendered by and legal as well as anti-immigrant commentators toprobe into the legal validity and the legitimacy of the existence of anchor babies as well as whether there are more pros than cons. From the outset of this essay, it is inevitably imperative that a definition of who an anchor baby is ought to be rendered. The phrase ‘anchor babies’ is metaphorical in that it is meant to evince the suspicious strategy employed by undocumented families and workers of having a baby so that the latter, being a U.S citizen would at some point in life apply for a family’s legal residence under the concept of family reunification. Generally, an anchor baby can be defined as a child is born to an illegal immigrant or undocumented parents especially in the United States of America and who by the operation of the U.S law acquires an automatic citizenship thus sponsoring the citizenship of other relatives into America.1 According to the principle jus soli, any baby delivered in the United States automatically acquires U.S citizenship. This doctrine is bolstered by the dint of section 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment which provides as follows; ‘All persons born or naturalised in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges and immunities of citizens of United State…’ Being an inclusive, the doctrine of jus solirenders anyone to become part of U.S citizens merely through birth; citizenship therefore becomes a birth right. A closely related doctrine is that of jus sanguinis, restrictively though in its application. This is in the sense that it solely defines citizenship by blood. In the U.S, the law on citizenship allows for citizenship under both jus soli and jus sanguinisas well as by naturalisation, viz by the operation of the law to move from a legal permanent resident to citizen. As such, the public debate insinuated above has focussed on alterations of such doctrines which have the effect of tendering an amendment of the U.S Constitution. Needles to say, efforts have been made towards this course. For instance, the amendment by Representative Elton Gallegly (Republican from Simi Valley California) who in June 1995 recommended in vain an amendment to the U.S Constitution to terminate automatic citizenship for U.S born children whose parents are undocumented immigrants. H Other efforts include the enactment of several legislation such as the U.S Citizens Reform Act 2005 and the Birth right Citizenship Act 2007. It has been cued that a disturbing number of undocumented women give birth to such children for the sole and only reason that they be ‘anchors’ in order that they defeat their deportation. This allegation however has been criticised as been ungrounded for the following reasons. Firstly, that there exists no imperative evidence that such undocumented female parents in fact do use this plot; and secondly, there is lack of a tangible excuse that such a strategy is a viable way to avoid deportation. The latter stems from the practicality of the strategy itself. This is because; such a child might not be able to assist the parents at all especially not in a time convenient to them. The law prescribes that it would take at least twenty one years for them to have the capacity to apply for reunification after which the process may take several years to complete. Even although there’s meagre or no evidence the anchor babies strategy is rampantly in use, conservative law makers have since proposed an amendment in the U.S Constitution to retrogressively revoke children’s citizenship in the event that there parents are not registered citizens at the time of the birth. Consequently, the amendment was to effect to the government to deport these children at any moment in their lives and within the ambits of the law. The pros and cons of ‘Anchor Babies’ Access to Citizenship The presence of a legal channel where workers and families who are not registered or documented gain access to a citizenship is a fulfilled quest for the realization of inherent human rights. This is in consideration of the dehumanizing status and conditions that the aforementioned category of people are subject. It cannot be gainsaid that such kind of individuals are succumbed to incessant fear of apprehension, bad treatment and imprisonment which has a negative bearing on every crook and crony of their lives ranging from medical care education to housing. Freedom from Fear and Mistreatment S.1348 of the Comprehensive Immigration Reformwould be capable of freeing the immigrants from fear to improve there lives and standards of living through a cautious enforcement of their socio-economic rights such as their rights to better housing employment and general security. And that is exactly what United States’ noble ideals of freedom and equality are all about. Impossible Path to Citizenship One major disadvantage of ideals against anchor babies, a virulent vice that is also reflected under section 1348,2is that it makes an impossibility to achieve citizenship for the majority of the existing illegal immigrant in the land consequent of which an upsurge of millions of low-wage earning U.S citizens devoid of voting rights.. The law holds that an immigrant raise upfront amount of $5,000 in fines as well as $2,000 for “processing fees,” which are unreasonable terms for low-wage earners. Furthermore, there is a requisite that the head of the household who in most cases id the wage earner to escheat to their home countries and then re-enter the U.S. Only very few would be financially able to do this, and if they did, they ran a risk of loosing their jobs. Population overgrowth Another possible disadvantage is population overgrowth which is an enormous hurdle to the efforts seeking to stabilize U.S. population to allow for ecological sustainability and a great motivation for much of the unlawful immigration. Conclusion The idea of denying birth-right citizenship broaches fundamental issues. In Homo Sacer, Giorgio Agamben poses, ‘who and what is German?’ or alternatively, ‘who and what is not German’. The intricacy here is that the rights and privileges that abound to a citizen are not absolute and fixed in our current times. Specifically the right of persons to be delivered into a nation might not be as permanent and alienable as it would have been previously contemplated. Works cited Minutemen; The Battle to Secure America’s Borders-pg 38 Karen K; Illegal Immigration EBook –pg 56 Leo Ralph C; The Latino Threat- pg 4-9 Journal The Founders of on Citizenship and Immigration Principles pg 26 http://civilliberty.about.com/od/immigrantsrights/g/Anchor-Babies-Definition.htm Read More