Another aspect of the "anchor baby" issue:
There are a rather large number of foreign nationals who come to the U.S. specifically to have their children born in the U.S. in order to have the child gain U.S. citizenship and then the parent(s) and child(ren) return to the homeland. This is often done as an "escape hatch" in the event of the need to flee their native country due to conditions in their native country. A lot of these persons having their children born in the U.S. are persons of some wealth and/or political position. Here in California it is not uncommon to see wealthy Middle-Eastern families (particularly Saudi) arrive with their preganant wives, have the child on U.S. soil, and then leave for thier homeland. The same holds for prominent familes in Latin American countries and other nationalities. These families, due to their wealth, prominence, and connections within the U.S. business and/or political worlds have effectively blocked any widespread immigration reform in fear that they would not have the refuge afforded by the "citizenship" rights held by their children. An acquaintance of mine who did work as a bodyguard for Middle-Eastern citizens visiting in the U.S. once told me that in the run-up to the fall of the Shah of Iran, he personally guarded several of the wives and families of high-level business and politcal leaders who feared what would happen to them should the Shah fall and they did not have an "anchor" to provide them with a rationale to flee to the U.S. This situation was in fact covertly encouraged by the State Department and various intelligence agencies in an effort to reassure their "assets" that the U.S. stood by them should anything happen. As long as this practice of turning a blind eye on the actions of the privileged few countinues, there will not be significant or effective immigration reform.
|