Debates over repealing the 14th Amendment are distracting voters from practical immigration reform.
By Aaron Walker
[email protected]
Some Republican presidential candidates continue to discuss ending birthright citizenship, but several experts and activists in Iowa say the topic distracts voters from realistic approaches to immigration reform.
At least seven candidates have either stated they are in favor of repealing the 14th Amendment or modifying it to prevent undocumented immigration motivated by the amendment.
But the law is not why immigrants come the United States, said Scott Peters, a professor of constitutional law at the University of Northern Iowa.
“People come here to find work,” Peters said. “So as long as that dynamic is still in play and there’s more opportunity for work here than elsewhere, not much will change.”
Currently, there are 4.1 million U.S.-born children of undocumented immigrants who were granted citizenship at birth, according to the Migration Policy Institute.
Still, to prevent some immigrants from coming illegally in search of birthright citizenship, some lawmakers, such as Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa, insist the change would not require an amendment.
“Because the Supreme Court has not interpreted the Constitution to mandate automatic birthright citizenship, the Congress can pass a law to correct the current misguided and incorrect policy of automatically granting citizenship to the children of illegal immigrants,” King said.
But the majority of legal experts disagree, Peters said.
“The candidates that are promising this are making the argument that you could do this through [Congress], and that’s not a view that’s held among lawyers and legal experts,” Peters said. “But if that’s all it takes to do it, then the president would be a player.”
If King is wrong, the president can only lobby for a constitutional amendment and the promises of presidential hopefuls may falter.
Many influential Republicans in Iowa, including John Stineman, a consultant with Strategic Elements, would prefer to discuss more realistic solutions to immigration reform.
“It’s a distraction,” Stineman said. “There are a lot of unifying issues and real opportunities to get things done and candidates are talking about undoing what is well over a century of American policy.”
He said Republicans should focus on solutions like increasing border enforcement and modernizing the immigration process, rather than repealing birthright citizenship.
“I would say that there’s a lot of common ground on immigration with respect to securing the border, modernizing legal immigration, modernizing enforcement,” Stineman said. “Let’s spend time talking about issues where there are opportunities for real reform.”
And the latest Iowa Poll conducted by the Des Moines Register would agree. Forty-seven percent of Iowa GOP caucus goers said they are in favor of rounding up undocumented immigrants and transporting them to their home country. With 400 Republicans likely caucusgoers surveyed, there is a margin of error of 4.9 percentage points.
Sandra Sanchez, director for the America’s Friends Service Committee’s Iowa Immigrant Voice Program, said she supports a path to citizenship for unauthorized immigrants and a streamlined immigration process for those who come legally.
“We are making this a distraction. It has become an entertainment show instead of talking about real issues and real concerns,” Sanchez said. “Immigration today is a mismanaged asset and the most important asset of any country is its people.”
She said the repercussions of a repeal would be negative for the entire country and “completely un-American.” And instead of hearing candidates discuss “realistic” solutions to immigration debates, candidates are pandering to conservative fringe groups.
“They will do anything to get the attention of their most conservative supporters,” Sanchez said. “These policies would not fly with average American people.”
