Although Anchor babies and babies born through birth tourism may be treated differently than other Americans, they are as American as those who obtain citizenship in other ways. The birth of both kinds of citizens is controversial. Jeb Bush drew criticism when he suggested that anchor babies were more Asian than they were American and that they were taking advantage of the “noble” concept of Birthright Citizenship to commit “fraud” against the American people (Grad).
There is evidence to support Bush’s view. Parents who engage in birth tourism often cite economic advantages among the main reasons they choose to give birth in the United States. When Işıl Eğrikavuk interviewed Turkish parents who chose to have their children in the United States, they cited the ability to provide their children with cheap education opportunities as a primary reason to make the United States their child’s birthplace. This suggests that Turkish families may be merely taking advantage of economic perks associated with US citizenship, rather than with embracing American values or assimilating.
Use your promo and get a custom paper on
"Birthright Citizenship: Anchor Babies and Birth Tourism".
For this reason, some would frown on the idea of birth tourism. Many worry that those who take advantage of birth tourism may “access free health and social benefits as the expense of US taxpayers.” (Eğrikavuk) This may be problematic when families who make use of birth tourism benefit from US citizenship and then return to their home countries. Indeed, the Los Angeles Times notes that in one incident, a California attorney was arrested on suspicion that she tried to sneak a woman from China out of the country while she was being investigated for immigration fraud (Grad). Someone who obtains citizenship for economic benefits and then leaves the country after receiving them might well be considered less American than other citizens.
On the other hand, it is also easy to see how those who take advantage of birth tourism can be seen as decidedly American. Like many Americans, they turn to America to give their children better lives. Most Americans, too, are descended from immigrants who came to America to seek a better life for their families. While children born through birth tourism may, indeed hold to strong Asian traditions and hold many similarities with people in their parents’ countries of origin, the same thing is true of most first-generation Americans.
Indeed, even after several generations, many Americans still have pride in the countries their ancestors descended from. This can be seen in the presence of Celtic Faires, Italian restaurants, Greek Orthodox churches and Hebrew schools throughout the nation. Furthermore, those who take advantage of America’s laws, culture and educational system often develop the same love of the country other citizens hold for it. They may easily invest as much in the country and have as much loyalty to it as someone whose family resided in the country for many generations.
Furthermore, many Americans whose families have resided in the country for generations do not have the same appreciation for the benefits of living in America. In some ways, those whose families may have more patriotism and may be more American than others, because they have a deeper understanding of why living in America is desirable. Meanwhile, Americans who become citizens through the process of naturalization may have similar ties to their mother countries, yet their American-ness is not questioned. Babies born through birth tourism, then, are as American as any other American citizen.
Anchor babies too, may be just as American, but they remain the subjects of controversy. Some use the term “anchor baby” to refer to parents who give birth to babies in America to help secure citizenship for themselves. Others suggest that this phenomenon may not be real and that children can only petition the government for citizenship for their parents after they turn 21 (Parvini). Babies who are used as tools and who are born in America only to be used might be seen as less American than other citizens. On the other hand, they grow up with other Americans, have the same rights as other Americans, work with other Americans and go to school with other Americans.
However, there are differences in the ways in which anchor babies and babies born through birth tourism are treated by other Americans and the way in which other Americans treat each other. Laura Hernandez suggests that they are treated as an unequal subclass. Many, she says, are unable to prove their immigration status and because of this face eviction and barriers to obtaining public housing (Hernandez 331). Hernandez says that without being able to prove their parentage or heritage, the children of undocumented immigrants or of parents who live abroad are often denied the protection they are guaranteed in the equal protection clause (Hernandez 331). They also suffer from racial discrimination and a process of “othering” in which Americans born to families who have been in the country for generations treat them as if they were a different kind of citizen.
Anchor babies and babies born through birth tourism can be just as American as the next citizen. They may share the same values as other Americans, grow up in the same circles and learn in the same schools. Yet they may be treated differently from other Americans and subjected to trials others do not face.
