Mexico in the U.S., Migratory Tsunami?

After some years, Spain opened the possibility that Spanish children acquire the Spanish nationality. My friend José Martínez Zorrilla went to the Spanish embassy in Mexico. He argued that he, the son of Mexicans, had been born in Spain, had lived his first years in Madrid, played soccer very well and hoped to acquire Spanish citizenship. The consul that interviewed him in the traditional style asked, in what seemed like a scolding, “What, if you were born in China, would you be Chinese?” Martínez Zorrilla had to be content with only one nationality, Mexican, which he had despite not having been born there. María Antonieta, his wife and a Spanish woman, had never been to Spain but had dual citizenship.

For developed countries, it is not enough to be born in the territory. A connection with the country is necessary which justifies the award of nationality to the children of foreigners. Only certain developed countries confer nationality through jus soli. This is what is done in Canada and the United States. In the terms of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution, people born or naturalized in the United States and subject to its jurisdiction are citizens of the United States. The Mexican Constitution gives a similar solution, which also adds the children of a Mexican parent born in other countries. For us, jus sanguinis, the right of blood, also operates.

In the United States, Mexican immigrants fall into various categories. On the top are those who achieve citizenship or United States nationality. They are admired by those who belong to the remaining categories. On the bottom are the pariahs. They are those without papers, who are nearly slaves, and are the illegal immigrants that live in the shadows. During the day, they do the heavy labor. No one is interested in what they do with their lives after the work day. In the middle are those who obtained their green card. These wait for citizenship by a stroke of luck or through their children who are automatically United States citizens by birth. One day they can “ask” that their parents or siblings become citizens.

The migratory tsunami that inundated the United States has not been sufficient for immigration reform. In its place, the possibility of taking away the citizenship of the children of illegal immigrants that are born in United States territory is now under review. The radicals in Congress think that the citizenship acquired by the children of illegal immigrants must be canceled. Other sensible people think that there are hardened premises such as the non-retroactive nature of the laws to the detriment of a person. In the debate, the creation of citizens of different categories is both the purpose and the consequence.

The central anti-immigrant argument is that those born in the United States obtained citizenship through an illegal act, such as the undocumented presence of their parents. Due to this they would not have the right to demand a nationality that does not pertain to them for being offenders of the law. The phenomenon of “anchor babies” worries legislators and a good part of United States society. Pregnant women cross the border to give birth in the United States. They believe it is offensive to their system.

That the “coffee threat” arises is an artificial worry — that is to say, the millions of Mexicans that immigrate in search of better opportunities. There are not pregnant mothers that cross the line or the Rio Grande in order for their children to be born in the desert of Arizona or the Texas prairies. The children of illegal immigrants that are born in the United States are of parents that spend years working in that country.

It is probable that a law would be created that establishes the necessity that in order to obtain United States citizenship, it would be necessary that there exists a connection between the applicant and the country.

Despite the fact that a global world exists, nationality is the most important stamp of an immigrant.

In the United States, they are proud that it is the land of liberty.

To step into United States territory is to be freed from one’s chains. If America changes the rule of jus soli, it will lose its moral qualification before the world and itself.