Immigration reform continues to be a polarizing issue, and the debate surrounding birthright citizenship is no exception. There are individuals who exploit the 14th Amendment, coming to the United States with the sole intention of giving birth so their children can claim U.S. citizenship. While this practice is not a conspiracy, it is a documented reality that has far-reaching implications, including placing unnecessary strain on the foster care system when some of these parents leave, abandoning their U.S.-born children.
The call to reform birthright citizenship is not about denying fundamental rights but about addressing loopholes that undermine its original intent. Critics often argue that any changes to this policy would challenge the citizenship rights of enslaved individuals and their descendants, invoking the amendment’s historical significance. However, this perspective, while emotionally resonant, is overly simplistic and fails to recognize the evolving context of constitutional law.
The 14th Amendment, ratified in 1868, was designed to secure the citizenship of formerly enslaved people and their children, ensuring they could not be denied rights due to their race or status. It was a groundbreaking provision for its time, crafted to address the injustices of slavery and the systemic exclusion of African Americans from the full benefits of citizenship. However, history is not static, and laws must adapt to the realities of the present.
We are no longer in the era of Reconstruction, and while the amendment’s protections were vital at the time, the specific population it was meant to shield no longer faces the same systemic threat. Many who benefited directly from the amendment have passed on, and their descendants are firmly established within the fabric of American society. Today, the context has shifted, and birthright citizenship is being misused in ways the framers could not have anticipated.
This misuse undermines the very principle of fairness that the amendment was designed to uphold. Reforming birthright citizenship would not erase history or deny the accomplishments of those who fought for its enactment. Rather, it would ensure that the law evolves to address modern challenges, protecting against exploitation while preserving the integrity of citizenship.
Those who oppose reform often cling to a narrow and rigid interpretation of constitutional law. They fail to acknowledge that the Constitution is a living document, designed to adapt to the needs of a changing society. Just as we must reexamine outdated gun laws in the face of mass shootings, we must also reconsider immigration policies to ensure they serve their intended purpose without enabling abuse.
Reform does not mean rejection. It means refinement. It means recognizing that the intent behind a law must align with its application in contemporary society. Addressing the misuse of birthright citizenship is not an attack on the rights of African Americans or any other group; it is a necessary step toward ensuring that citizenship remains a privilege and responsibility, not a loophole.
Let us move beyond emotional appeals and engage in a nuanced, fact-based discussion about immigration reform. The goal is not to diminish history but to ensure that the laws we uphold today serve the realities of the present while maintaining the principles of justice and fairness for future generations.
Birthright citizenship must evolve—not as a rejection of its past, but as a commitment to a fairer, more equitable future.
By Renaldo McKenzie, Editor-in-Chief
Renaldo is also Creator and Host of The Neoliberal Round Podcast and YouTube Channel and Author of the book: “Neoliberalism, Globalization, Income inequality, Poverty and Resistance” available at our store at https://store,theneoliberal.com
Email us at [email protected]
Call us at 1-445-260-9198 or 1-267-471-8884
