The challenge of assimilating too many people too quickly is often dismissed as racism, yet collisions of cultural patterns and norms creates the potential for social violence, and this is readily and empirically provable from our history. There are also understood, though arguable rates of assimilation; whereas, exceeding the rates produces unhealthy and unnecessary conflict and stress in society. The Babylonian confusion in having multiple languages too, as well as the expensive provisions to alleviate the same is similarly dismissed and likewise unnecessary—borne every day by Americans, who speak English and never cast one ballot to speak or do their business in any other. Economists will argue macro and microeconomics, but the local competition for jobs is real and felt, as is the transfer of wealth both within and without the national economy. Moreover, through fraud or physical presence alone, the development of political constituencies occurs, aided by institutions and organizations with special interests and ties to lobbyists. Illegal aliens press informally and formally to be heard and represented, thus reshaping the political landscape through sheer demographic weight.

It is not a prudential compassion to let the soup line invade the kitchen or kill the cook. Moreover, at some stage we have to ask if there isn’t a responsibility others have to take care of their own home and countries, not by milking someone else’s cow but by raising their own; not by breaking and entering a better place owned by someone else, but by making a better place where they live and doing the work Americans did in their own backyards. The foreign policy of the United States is strange and insipient that serves as an economic and political safety valve to corrupt and tyrannical regimes worldwide, particularly at our own doorstep. Indeed, more immigrants would likely be welcome if immigration were distinct from joining the polity, or laying claim to social services; and if the children of illegal immigrants—and legal immigrants on work status—were not conferred full rights of U.S. citizenship through the accident of birth and an asinine misinterpretation of the 14^th Amendment.

One of the biggest magnets for illegal immigration is the policy whereby children of illegal aliens born within the geographical limits of the United States are entitled to U.S. citizenship. The policy is a perversion of American political tradition in that, under the Constitution the premise of citizenship is based on consent of the governed. Citizenship does not exist by nature but is created by law, and according to political science professor Edward Erler, the identification of citizens has always been essential to sovereignty. The Constitution mentions but does not define our citizenship. The first definition entered in 1868 as the result of the 14^th Amendment, passed in the immediate aftermath of the War Between the States. The Amendment created dual state and national citizenships, however mandating that state law not abridge the basic rights due according to national citizenship. Familiar language includes: "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside."

We have somehow come to believe that anyone born within the geographical limits of the U.S. is automatically subject to its jurisdiction, but this renders the jurisdiction clause superfluous and without force. If this had been the intent the framers of the Amendment, they would have simply said that all persons born or naturalized in the United States are thereby citizens. Indeed, during debates on the Amendment, northern congressmen assured the whole country that while language was intended to make freedmen (freed slaves) and their children citizens, it did not make Indians or their children citizens! Indians were not subject to the same jurisdiction; that is to say, Indians owed allegiance to their tribes. Illinois Senator Lyman Trumbull, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee rose to support this view, saying that, "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" meant "not owing allegiance to anybody else and being subject to the complete jurisdiction of the United States." This excluded persons born in the United States who were foreigners, aliens, or who belonged to families of ambassadors and foreign ministers. Senator Jacob Howard of Ohio compared the right of expatriation favorably with the right of citizenship. In other words, jurisdiction was the critical qualifier to right of citizenship, more so than place of birth. It is absurd to think the 14^th Amendment confers the boon of American citizenship on the children of illegal aliens, and difficult to fathom how those who defy American law could derive benefit for their children—or that any sovereign nation would allow it. The same confusion has led us to tolerate dual citizenship, when framers of the 14^th Amendment specified that citizens must owe their exclusive allegiance to the United States, in order to be included in its jurisdiction. Broken borders and broken birthright are the harbingers of America’s decline and eclipse of the American century so-called, unless we stop the madness and begin to reapply horse sense to what is happening.

_____________________