[mc32]

Not quite. Citizenship is a somewhat odd thing (think China or Japan and other places and how they interpret citizenship) in that countries have different views on it and how its gained (some require military service, for example). And the children are no less a citizen, but they are also not less of a citizen of the second country either (which seems to be an implication some are trying to make)

So your parents were not more American than say they were Irish [if their parents were still legally Irish at their births]. They were the same. But we're trying to say they are more American than they are Irish and by law they would not be.

[tptacek]

Can you bring us back to the place where I am meant to care about this? We are talking about people who have known no other country than their home country --- America.

[mc32]

Well, affected families have two options --split up (some in America some back home in Croatia, Honduras, etc. or follow their parents as their dual citizenship allows and apply for visa and citizenship as allowed by law.

[tptacek]

I agree that those are the options. What I don't understand is how that isn't abhorrent: lose your parents, or lose your home country. What kind of a choice is that? No kind at all. We owe our countrymen better than that. I mean, we just plainly do; it's close to the bare minimum obligation we have as a nation.

[postcarnival]

Simple solution: amend the constitution and ban the 14th amendments birthright clause. Are there any other countries on Earth that support people sneaking in to pop out a baby with the knowledge that said country will fully pay for and grant all rights and privileges to that child? No. It's not about compassion for immigrants, it's about reality and economics. We have millions of homeless and impoverished in our own backyards so let's stop incentivizing the poor of other countries to come here and get a free ride on the back of our middle class.

[dragonwriter]

> amend the constitution and ban the 14th amendments birthright clause.

And replace it with what, exactly? That clause [0] is, after all, what created uniform national citizenship, and eliminated varying and discriminatory state citizenship policies. Even if one agrees that the "anchor baby" problem is something that warrants limiting citizenship to combat (highly contentious proposition itself), simply blowing up the entire post-Civil War model of US citizenship is a rather brute approach with wide ranging consequences outside the immediate target area.

[0] "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside."

[tptacek]

Are you advocating that we amend the Constitution to strip the citizenship from a class of American citizens?