(English → Español) View originalTranslators:
Wednesday, March 30, 2011c8w927rkrt9yeox00od0e8ucqesbg2sa
Constitutional Citizenship: A Legislative History sbq9ahbqexojxbadp215ubm1dgxt0f9z
For Immediate Release
March 28, 2011ixqxcbn50wqrja5e0mcif4tajec7w4cw
Washington, D.C. – Today, the Immigration Policy Center releases Constitutional Citizenship: A Legislative History, by 14th Amendment scholar Garrett Epps. One of the most insidious attacks on immigrants at both the federal and state level is the suggestion that the U.S. should repeal the citizenship clause of the 14th Amendment and deny birthright citizenship to the children of certain immigrants. 07md3sv54n9puxdfbu2hp9bjzi403dodSome proponents of this position argue that the Framers of the 14th Amendment never intended that birthright citizenship extend to the children of temporary immigrants and unauthorized immigrants.4z1oxcxhgsynbv1pol593x8wsht2b0zq
Epps argues that the Framers of the 14th Amendment lived during a period of increasing immigration, in which Chinese laborers were the temporary immigrants of the day and “gypsies” were the unauthorized immigrants of the 19th century. The 14th Amendment provided for birthright citizenship for both of these populations, and most certainly provides for birthright citizenship for the children of temporary and unauthorized immigrants today.9nsamtk2zua44aevu4wcgjv347ahp335
Perhaps most fundamentally, Epps explains that the Framers of the 14th Amendment were intent on changing the status quo and undoing the impact of years of slavery. They sought to amend the Constitution and not replicate the discriminatory policies of the antebellum period. A true analysis of the original intent of the Framers finds that they could not have intended to create a new population of vulnerable persons who, because of the national origins or actions of their parents, are denied U.S. citizenship.cvr08120hcl6scub9inv8mvx7jydomtd
Epps writes: If the children of “illegal aliens” are “illegal” themselves, then we have taken a giant step toward recreating slavery in all but name. If citizenship is the hereditary gift of the nation rather than the inheritance of its people, we are drifting back toward the discredited doctrine of Dred Scott…The clamor for hereditary inequality comes from people eager to repeat the mistakes of the American past, and by doing so, to betray the American future.v9z5h33ek8xydn9019ddzdy6o907p1rh
To view the piece in its entirety, click on the headline:
Constitutional Citizenship: A Legislative History (IPC Special Report, March 28, 2011)
0l71307k84u9bc73bivfjkfnjgt07aee
#lil8likxstgwamnjngeh42hbv8u7l1xo#lil8likxstgwamnjngeh42hbv8u7l1xo#lil8likxstgwamnjngeh42hbv8u7l1xo
For more information contact Wendy Sefsaf at wsefsaf@immcouncil.org or 202-507-7524.zr54diforr9bdivrx169wk0j6u8lhlb4
(original) View Español translation
Wednesday, March 30, 2011
Constitutional Citizenship: A Legislative History
For Immediate Release
March 28, 2011
Washington, D.C. – Today, the Immigration Policy Center releases Constitutional Citizenship: A Legislative History, by 14th Amendment scholar Garrett Epps. One of the most insidious attacks on immigrants at both the federal and state level is the suggestion that the U.S. should repeal the citizenship clause of the 14th Amendment and deny birthright citizenship to the children of certain immigrants. Some proponents of this position argue that the Framers of the 14th Amendment never intended that birthright citizenship extend to the children of temporary immigrants and unauthorized immigrants.
Epps argues that the Framers of the 14th Amendment lived during a period of increasing immigration, in which Chinese laborers were the temporary immigrants of the day and “gypsies” were the unauthorized immigrants of the 19th century. The 14th Amendment provided for birthright citizenship for both of these populations, and most certainly provides for birthright citizenship for the children of temporary and unauthorized immigrants today.
Perhaps most fundamentally, Epps explains that the Framers of the 14th Amendment were intent on changing the status quo and undoing the impact of years of slavery. They sought to amend the Constitution and not replicate the discriminatory policies of the antebellum period. A true analysis of the original intent of the Framers finds that they could not have intended to create a new population of vulnerable persons who, because of the national origins or actions of their parents, are denied U.S. citizenship.
Epps writes: If the children of “illegal aliens” are “illegal” themselves, then we have taken a giant step toward recreating slavery in all but name. If citizenship is the hereditary gift of the nation rather than the inheritance of its people, we are drifting back toward the discredited doctrine of Dred Scott…The clamor for hereditary inequality comes from people eager to repeat the mistakes of the American past, and by doing so, to betray the American future.
To view the piece in its entirety, click on the headline:
Constitutional Citizenship: A Legislative History (IPC Special Report, March 28, 2011)
###
For more information contact Wendy Sefsaf at wsefsaf@immcouncil.org or 202-507-7524.