Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Birthright citizenship debate in america essay
The dred scott case
Birthright citizenship debate in america essay
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Birthright citizenship debate in america essay
Since the 1800s, immigration has been considered a problem that is out of control in the United States. Government officials have claimed that the issue of birthright citizenship is the core of the dispute over immigration. To try and remedy this situation, holders of public office have held hearings and debates in an attempt to “redefine” what it means to be an American citizen. Birthright citizenship is the term used to refer to the citizenship that is granted to an individual who is born on the associated territory. Providing an individual with citizenship of any state or country means that one now has the rights, privileges and duties of a citizen in the related region. In the United States, birthright citizenship is a highly controversial topic; constant debates are held to discuss the effects of this issue. Whether for birthright citizenship or against it, both parties collect main ideas and events to answer the same question—Should birthright citizenship be carried on into the future of the United States? In 1868, congress passed the Fourteenth Amendment that granted citizenship to all those who are born on U.S. soil. The Fourteenth Amendment was constructed to rectify the dispute that was caused by the Dred Scott case. Dred Scott vs. Sanford was a case where the U.S. Supreme Court said that African Americans that were imported to the United States and held as slaves could never be U.S. citizens because they were not protected by the constitution. In Section 1 of the 14th amendment it states “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. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the ... ... middle of paper ... ...es Constitution. N.p., 2010. Web. 08 Mar. 2011. . "ELK V. WILKINS, 112 U. S. 94 :: Volume 112 :: 1884." US Supreme Court Cases from Justia & Oyez. N.p., n.d. Web. 08 Mar. 2011. . "Immigration Foes Target Baby Citizens." CNN.com - Breaking News, U.S., World, Weather, Entertainment & Video News. Cable News Network, 5 Jan. 2011. Web. 04 Mar. 2011. . Preston, Julia. "State Lawmakers Outline Plans to End Birthright Citizenship, Drawing Outcry." Nytimes.com. The New York Times, 5 Jan. 2011. Web. 4 Mar. 2011. .
America is a nation consisting of many immigrants: it has its gates opened to the world. These immigrants transition smoothly and slowly from settlement, to assimilation then citizenship. These immigrants are first admitted lawfully as permanent residents before they naturalize to become full citizens. In her book “Impossible Subjects: Illegal Aliens and the Making of Modern America”, the historian Mae Ngai draws our attention to the history of immigration and citizenship in America. Her book examines an understudied period of immigration regulation between 1924 and 1965.
The radical reconstruction tried to bring the south to submission while protecting blacks. This brought forward the 14th amendment which stated that all citizens born or naturalized in the U.S. are citizens of the United States. Then came along the 15th amendment was passed that stated that black m...
The 14th Amendment was made in 1868 to allow every person who was born in America or who had become an American citizen to have the same rights as any other citizen. Additionally, they were also a citizen of whatever state they lived in. No state in America was allowed to make laws that limit US citizens’ rights and protection, execute people, imprison people or take their property away without a legal process.
Meyer v. State of Nebraska. 262 U.S. 390, 399, 43 Sct. 625, 626, 67 L.Ed. 1042. (1923)
Valbrun, Marjorie. "Children of Illegal Immigrants Struggle When Parents Are Deported." The Children of Undocumented Immigrants. Ed. David Haugen and Susan Musser. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2013. At Issue. Rpt. from "Foster Care, Uncertain Futures Loom for Thousands of Immigrant Children." America's Wire. 2012. Opposing Viewpoints in Context. Web. 11 Apr. 2014.
This amendment was created during the reconstruction phase attempting to reunite this country after the brutal battles of the Civil War. Henretta and Brody emphasize how the Republicans were progressing in a direction to sanctify the civil rights of the black community. These authors contend the vital organ of the document was the wording in the first section. It said “all persons born or naturalized in the United States were citizens.” No state could abridge “the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States”; deprive “any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law”; or deny anyone “the equal protection of the laws.”2 Imagine the problems that could arise in the country if repeal were to come to a realization. Henretta and Brody point out how the wording in section 1 of the document was written in a way that could be construed as inexplicit. The reason for this was for the judicial system and Congress could set an example for balance in due process here in the
The fourteenth amendment defined a citizen as being anyone who was born within the United States. The negative elements of the fourteenth amendment are twofold; First, it only established voting rights for men; and secondly, the way the fourteenth amendment was used by the northern states against the southern states. By doing so the fourteenth amendment disallowed women the right to vote. By in large, the fourteenth amendment virtually denied the right to vote to almost all southern white
BOWERS V. HARDWICK, 478 U. S. 186 :: Volume 478 :: 1986 :: Full Text." US Supreme Court Cases from Justia & Oyez. .
Irene Bloemraad. The North American Naturalization Gap: AN Institutional Approach to Citizenship Acquisition in the United States and Canada. Retrieved from https://courses.ryerson.ca/@@/CF12EBC688315C67DED46723CFC1F310/courses/1/pog100_w14_01/content/_2488288_1/Bloemraad2002.pdf
Preston, Julia. “Immigrants May Become Legal Under Agency Plan.” The New York Times 2 Oct. 2009, A15 sec,:A15.
...it: Greenhaven Press, 2013. At Issue. Rpt. from "The Future of Immigrant Children." The Future of Children (Spring 2011).Opposing Viewpoints in Context. Web. 21 Apr. 2014.
In his address to a joint session of Congress on January 8, 1918, President Woodrow Wilson declared freedom of the seas in times of peace and war. Looking back, it seems ridiculous to think that anyone could challenge the right of individuals to navigate the oceans freely. However, fast-forward to the twenty-first century and we can see an analogous debate over the issue of immigration rights, with territorial borders being the main topic of discussion. The system of immigration in the United States is complex and oftentimes restrictive, and while revisions to the system usually include increasing quotas or other solutions to let in certain groups of people who deserve special consideration (such as those whose skills are needed in a particular field), they are still very limited solutions. The obvious question that arises from letting in some people but not others is that of fairness. Is the accident of birth or luck of being in the right place at the right time enough to justify restrictive citizenship to a select few? I would argue not. I intend to argue that a commitment to human rights entails the position that borders ought to be open in order to guarantee other human rights, especially the right to migrate.
Suprynowicz, Vin. “The United States Should Not Adopt Open Adoption.” Opppsing Viewpoints: Immigration. Eds. David M. Haugen, Susan Musser and Kacy Lovelace. Farmington Hills, MI: Greenhaven Press, 2009. 141-146. Print.
The removal of birthright citizenship means the United States will be full of people who are stateless (not recognized as a citizen of any country). At the moment, there are more than ten thousand stateless people living in the United States of America (Gonzalez). These people have no rights here and if they were to leave for another country they would still have no rights due to the fact that the only country they have lived in is the United States. If the U.S. were to have a larger amount of stateless people the country will be compared to countries like Myanmar or Thailand who have hundreds of thousands of stateless people (see chart to the left for more information)(Shatz). The U.S. must realize that if saving people in other countries is important, but saving people who live in this nation should be a priority. Stateless people legally have no options as to what they can do. If they are rejected by one country who is to say that other countries will not reject them also. Stateless people are unprotected and vulnerable and if the United States ended birthright citizenship the nation would be adding to a culture of cultureless
Will and in this essay the author challenges the citizenship status of children born to illegal immigrants. Will argues that the 14th Amendment, which grants citizenship to any person born in the United States, is being misinterpreted. He explains how this misinterpretation leads to the actual act of illegal immigration. For example, by essentially rewarding the children of illegal immigrants with an American citizenship Will demonstrates how this provides an incentive for illegal immigration. The author makes clear the idea that when the 14th Amendment was written in 1866 it could not have included illegal immigrants since that concept did not exist at that time. He continues by using Indians as an example of people not included in the 14th Amendment since Indians and their children owed allegiance to their tribes. Finally, the author uses a decision by the Supreme Court in 1884 that declared both person and country must consent to the citizenship; therefore, if the source is illegal then the child should not be considered a