Image

Birthright Citizenship in the United States

Birthright Citizenship in the United States

Over the years, the issue of US citizenship by birth has raised many controversies. This is clearly seen in the number of legislations that have been brought to the national assembly for amendment. The two articles by Stock Margaret and Feere Jon, have presented arguments that focus on retaining and abolishing Birthright Citizenship in the US.

Jon Feere presents an argument in favor of abolishing the Birthright Citizenship in the US. He points out that the policy on Birthright citizenship in the United States is not a good policy because it presents numerous challenges to the nation. He argues that illegal immigrants and aliens use this policy as a way of shielding themselves from going back to their native countries. This is because parents of US citizens by birth can migrate to the US permanently (Feere 1). He argues that the government has failed in checking issues surrounding births by illegal immigrants and aliens living in the US. Jon Feere blames the 14th amendment for this problem. This is because the language on the clause is not very clear. He also adds that off all the first world countries, it is only the US that has maintained the Birthright Citizenship policy. This burdens the immigrants with US problems and also gives them benefits that rightly belong to US citizens (Feere 1).

On the other hand, the article by Stock Margaret, argues that the removal of the Citizenship by birth right will be an unnecessary inconvenience to the country. Although it is important to have checks and balances on issue of citizenship, especially to foreigners it is also necessary to bear in mind that this right has been in existence for many years (Stock 1). Therefore, if the Birth right citizenship is abolished it will be very difficult to verify who is a US citizen. The US has not put in place the right mechanisms to identify citizens. If the 14th amendment is revoked most US citizens will lose their citizenship and risk. Generally the article argues that, changing the 14th amendment will lead to a cumbersome process of applying for citizenship or risk being stateless (Stock 1).

The arguments presented by the two articles are very logical and important if the US wants to solve the problem of illegal immigrants. The article by Stock Margaret has been able to raise a practical view point in tackling the problem. Although it is important to work towards reducing the problem of illegal immigrants, revoking the birthright citizenship will create a much bigger challenge. This is because the US has no clear methods of registration to verify who is a citizen and who is not. The process of birth verification for those people, who have lived in the US for many years, is very cumbersome because they lack documentation. For instance, people who acquired citizenship by birth seventy years ago may find it almost impossible to go through the process successfully. In addition, revoking the 14th amendment puts the children of some American citizens at risk of losing their citizenship (Stock 1). This perspective brings out an interesting aspect on the issue of illegal immigrants.

The article by Jon Feere points out that the US has been very reluctant in solving the issue of illegal immigrants. This is because the country has failed to curb the increasing number of people who acquire their citizenship by birth. It is not logical for the country to deny parents citizenship and provide the children with the right to become citizens. This leads to high population and adds a burden to the US. Therefore, it is necessary to ensure that birthright citizenship is revoked. This will prevent tourists, aliens and illegal people to carry the burden of the country or enjoy the benefits that they have not worked to acquire. Unlike the first article this scholarly source argues that the high number of citizenships offered by the government is caused by lack of clarity in the 14th amendment. In addition, the article points out that there is a great need in changing the 14th amendment or revoke it to ensure that not everyone is granted citizenship. This is because the issue of immigrants has caused the US a lot of challenges. The article focuses more on analyzing the problem and the solution without considering challenges that may be experienced during the implementation of the proposed solution.

The article by Stock Margaret is more interesting and logical. This is because it focuses on the issue of immigration and birthright citizenship. It also provides an analysis of challenges expected by changing the 14th amendment. The article gives an analysis of the problem and provides a solution, which is fit for the issue. In addition, the article also highlights on the challenges of changing the 14th amendment. However, the article by Jon Feere fails in providing the negative side and the positive angle of the suggested solution. Therefore, the article by Stock Margaret is more persuasive because it tackles all the issues in a clear manner and provides the advantages and disadvantages of the solution.

From the argument it is clear that the author of this article is more conversant with the topic on birthright citizenship in the US. Hence, the article provides a clear perspective on this issue, which helps the audience to understand all the underlying concerns about the proposed solution. The article does not just present the argument about the problem but also helps the reader to have a wider perspective of the problem. It is not enough to point a problem and provide a solution but it is also necessary to identify any challenges that the country might face during the implementation process.

From a scholarly point of view I believe that the two articles have presented the issue on birthright citizenship clearly. However, the article by Legal Shield has managed to convince the audience on the steps to take in solving the problem. It has also gained credibility in scholarship because the article tackles even the issues that will be incurred if the 14th amendment was to be changed to prevent birthright citizenship. In addition, the author does not limit himself in providing the solution, but goes deeper to analyze the solution from different angles. Nevertheless, the article by Jon Feere presents a good argument but with many limitations. The argument presented fails to tackle the potential problems that are likely to occur if the 14th amendment is changed to revoke the birthright citizenship in the US.

Conclusion

According to the two articles by Stock Margaret and Jon Feere, Birthright citizenship is an aspect of the US constitution that has been in existence for many years. This has presented a big problem to the country because immigrants use their children as an opportunity to relocate to the US permanently. Although, it is important for the US look at the issue of birthright citizenship the consequences cannot be ignored.


Need More or Something Else?

Hire Writer