|| News ||
Page 1 of 1

Save the 14th Amendment

Gay people have a real interest in fighting the effort to strip birthright citizenship from the 14th amendment, says Immigration Equality executive director Rachel B. Tiven.

RACHELTIVEN X390

COMMENTARY: Don’t know much about history, do they? 

That’s a sad statement to make about the U.S. Congress, but evidently a true one, given the recent pile-on of Republican senators calling for repeal — or “investigation” — of birthright citizenship. Senate majority leader Harry Reid noted that his colleagues have “either taken leave of their senses or their principles.”

In fact, they may have taken leave of both, as their ridiculous, racist campaign betrays a basic misunderstanding of American history and of the Constitution.

First, a quick history lesson: Before the Civil War, there was no definition of American citizenship. Slaves were not citizens, and women’s citizenship was tenuous at best. A woman who married a foreign national could be stripped of her citizenship, and of course, women, slaves, and most nonwhites could not vote. Neither the Declaration of Independence nor the U.S. Constitution, as originally ratified, defined who was an American citizen or how to become one. The Supreme Court’s infamous Dred Scott decision — which brought pre-Civil War tensions closer to a boil by holding that Congress could not prohibit slavery in federal territory — reaffirmed that “Negroes” were not and could not be citizens.

For slaves, the needed result of the Civil War was not just freedom from bondage but entry into the social contract. Freedom without citizenship was an empty promise, and thus 2-1/2 years after the Thirteenth Amendment ended slavery, Congress ratified the Fourteenth Amendment.

The Fourteenth Amendment was the centerpiece of Reconstruction, and it finally provided the United States with a definition of who exactly was a citizen. Its very first words read: “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.”

Reread that sentence and ask yourself, Without it, who would be an American? Would I? On what basis? In a nation where 98% of us are here as the result of immigration at some point in time, who among us has been here “long enough”? Who gets to decide?

The spectacle of our country’s leaders calling for a repeal of birthright citizenship is despicable, disappointing, and thoroughly predictable. For too many of our politicians, history and context are irrelevant; all that matters is the next election.

Of course, the people being targeted by this rhetoric are undocumented immigrant workers, the majority of whom are Latino. These millions of workers keep American agriculture, construction, and service industries afloat. They often earn below the minimum wage and are too intimidated to demand the safety rules and labor protections to which they are legally entitled. The echoes of slavery are loud: People of color working for next to nothing, without legal standing or any current hope of ever gaining it, whose toil supports the “American way of life” — today not cotton but cheap food, overbuilt housing, and disposable consumer goods. To complete the disenfranchisement of undocumented workers by denying their children the very rights for which we fought the Civil War would be the perfect irony.

LGBT people should find this particularly disgusting. At Immigration Equality, we hear every day from people who face double discrimination: because they are immigrants and simultaneously because they are also lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender.

Those dual lines of attack are no coincidence: The very same people who are leading the charge to strip citizenship from the children of immigrants are those who have long led the charge to strip the rights of full citizenship from LGBT people. On the latter front, their crusades are beginning to falter, with historic judicial and legislative victories affirming the rights of LGBT people. Sadly, politicians desperate for a scapegoat in an era of recession and war are attacking not only the newest citizens, they are attacking our precious Constitution.

The Fourteenth Amendment is a cornerstone of our liberty — it is precisely what makes us who we are, and without it we would not know ourselves as Americans.

Rachel B. Tiven is executive director of Immigration Equality and the Immigration Equality Action Fund. This article is the opinion of the writer and not The Advocate. 

Follow us on Twitter Follow us on Twitter. Follow us on Facebook Follow us on Facebook. Page 1 of 1
Reader Comments
  • Name: Rodger
    Date posted: 2/1/2011 12:15:29 AM
    Hometown: Seattle

    Comment:

    Citizenship claims of children born to non-citizens and same-sex partners are neither supported by tradtional lines of property. Rights of ownership necessitate lack of rights of disownership.

  • Name: Melinda Wallace
    Date posted: 9/9/2010 10:13:50 PM
    Hometown: Salt Lake City, Utah

    Comment:

    One precept, upon which we must stand firm, is our 14th Amendment. The States must never cede jurisdictional authority over Family Law, Adoption Law, Child Protective Services and child custody determinations to a foreign entity. Too many newborn infants would languish in foster care, be unable to be legally and lawfully adopted in the country in which they were born and be left without parents or state to protect them. Far too many young women, ages, 13-17, who need to relinquish infants to adoption because they are unable to care for them, would not be served. Additionally, infants and children who suffer from neglect or abuse would not be legally protected by the State in which they reside because they would not be legal citizens and not "subject to the jurisdiction" of that state. Lastly, as a Christian mother and grandmother, I want all children, born in my state to have adequate food and medical services. I don't want starving Migrant Worker Children left uncared for.

  • Name: LOR
    Date posted: 8/26/2010 2:24:11 PM
    Hometown: San Francisco

    Comment:

    Rachel, Thank you for this article on this issues that is vital to our community. I only wish you had gone further. The Religious Right has now been pushing the idea that the 14th Amendment only applies to African Americans. They've been developing this argument specifically in order to exclude LGBTs -- to make sure we can't use the 14th Amendment to argue in favor of equal civil marriage rights. We need to understand that there is a new, coordinated strategy to redefine, and eradicate if possible, the 14th Amendment in this country -- the bedrock constitutional basis for equality of all under the law. And these folks are set to take over Congress in November ... it's terrifying.

  • Name: dano
    Date posted: 8/18/2010 12:08:20 AM
    Hometown: Midwest USA where winter is winter dammit

    Comment:

    pepa go back to albania or burma or north korea or yemen or wherever your addled brain is from, because you obviously have no effing clue what america is about. freedom is the freedom not to listen to morons like you!!!

  • Name: Greg
    Date posted: 8/16/2010 2:39:21 PM
    Hometown: Providence RI

    Comment:

    @pepa: ok let's hope it was childish - I was afraid "peepee on pepa" was a reference to his sexual fetish!

  • Name: pepa
    Date posted: 8/16/2010 2:16:00 PM
    Hometown: surprise, az

    Comment:

    "@pepa, your generalizations are false, you are a dick, and you aren't worthy of being listened to." The drones are getting more desperate. At least I use my SN on every comment and don't need to change it so that I can post asinine, childish statements (which I don't). Welcome to kindergarten kids! LOL

  • Name: pepa
    Date posted: 8/16/2010 2:12:22 PM
    Hometown: surprise, az

    Comment:

    "for those of you who think there's actually a chance for bipartisanism to actually work - you're NAIVE as shit." -- I don't disagree with that. I think both parties are one in the same and "bipartisanship" is just well, a "mind fuck" to distract you and make the illusion that "two distinct" parties are "coming together." I believe that the GOP wanted the Obama care reform to pass so they can use it as a wedge issue. Will they repeal such intrusive legislation? NO, of course not. It is like when the democrats promised to repeal the Patriot Act and they did not, instead Janet Napolitano declared returning veterans and libertarians to be (or anybody that disagrees with the Obama administration) terrorists. One party builds it and the other one takes it over. Imagine if we get like a Sarah Palin type as DHS secretary and declaring Get Equal! a terrorist group. Or becoming head of HHS and through Obamacare force every gay man to do an HIV test, oh my the irony!

  • Name: Jake Orlando
    Date posted: 8/16/2010 1:31:45 PM
    Hometown: Long Beach

    Comment:

    Relax, people. Nobody's touching the 14th Amendment. Remember, Conservatives always come up with new wingnut talking points du jour. This is one of them. If you don't believe me, try picturing the states ratifying such a proposal.

  • Name: peepee on pepa
    Date posted: 8/16/2010 1:15:12 PM
    Hometown: PooPooville

    Comment:

    @pepa, your generalizations are false, you are a dick, and you aren't worthy of being listened to.

  • Name: Say NO to Republicans
    Date posted: 8/16/2010 1:11:15 PM
    Hometown: USA

    Comment:

    Wasn't it a Republiturd who said (of the Constitution) "It's just a goddamned piece of paper"? HINT: Yes - George W. Bush. Is it really a surprise that Republiturds want to destroy the Constitution? They're against the ACLU. They're against ANY ammendment other than the first or second (unless it's THEIR due process that's threatened, and then it's a different story). Face it - EVERY DECISION A REPUBLITURD MAKES IS THE WRONG ONE FOR THE COUNTRY. For those of you who would disagree, or want to play nice and namby-pamby, for those of you who think there's actually a chance for bipartisanism to actually work - you're NAIVE as shit.

 PREVIOUS 1 2 3 4 5 NEXT  


Don't Miss
  • Best of Broadway Smash: Why You Will Love It

    Craig Zadan and Neil Meron, two of the producers of NBC’s new critically acclaimed musical series, explain why the backstage drama of creating a musical about Marilyn Monroe has mass appeal and why big stars like Anjelica Huston, Uma Thurman, Bernadette Peters, and Nick Jonas were eager to appear in it.

  • Best of Broadway How Broadway Does a Flea Market

    Find out why actress Kathleen Chalfant calls the annual Flea Market and Grand Auction in Times Square "the most glamorous flea market you've ever seen." It raised half a million dollars to fight HIV/AIDS.

  • Travel Slideshow Flag Gayest Cities in America, 2012

    It's no secret that megalopolises New York City, Chicago, and Los Angeles have robust LGBT life — and we've even heard tell of little queer hoods like the Castro and P-Town. This isn't that list.

 
 
Advocate Subscribe Promo Banner 300x50
 
Follow Us Follow Us on FacebookFollow Us on TwitterSubscribe to our RSS feedsDownload our app
Facebook Activity
 
1056 COVER X135 | ADVOCATE.COM
Today's Headlines