3 ms·

What makes the parents of an anchor baby more deserving of citizenship than a person who worked hard, went to school and developed skills useful to the US? Why

What makes the parents of an anchor baby more deserving of citizenship than a person who worked hard, went to school and developed skills useful to the US? Why do we consider this more beneficial to the US than instead importing the highly skilled person who goes through the system rather than subverting it? (Again, working within the normative framework suggesting immigration should be restricted, which is not my view.)

foldr 11y ago
It's not really about the parent so much as the child. The child deserves to have parents that are present in its life.
- yummyfajitas 11y ago
  The parents can raise the child in their home country if that's an important concern. As far as I know, no country will deprive a child of citizenship simply because he was born while the parents were on vacation.
  - foldr 11y ago
    Right, there's no chance of that being impractical or harmful to the child.
    - yummyfajitas 11y ago
      Of course it's harmful to the child. But there are millions of children born in various parts of the world who would suffer the same harms. Why should we protect a Mexican child who's parents crept across the border to give birth, but not an Indian child who's parents applied for immigration but were rejected? I feel like you are implicitly appealing to a very extreme version of the Copenhagen interpretation of ethics: http://blog.jaibot.com/the-copenhagen-interpretation-of-ethics/ http://blog.jaibot.com/the-copenhagen-interpretation-of-ethi...
      - foldr 11y ago
        The question isn't who we should protect, but who the US government should protect in the course of implementing its immigration policy. The Indian child is not a US citizen.
        yummyfajitas 11y ago
        If you scroll up you'll see that we are discussing whether current policy is good, not what current policy actually is. "Is" != "aught".
        foldr 11y ago
        Yes, I know. I think that it is legitimate for the US government to prioritize the interests of US citizens in implementing and defining its immigration policy. After all, if it did not, the US would simply have open borders, and there is not much point in discussing that hypothetical.
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
rchaud 11y ago
>What makes the parents of an anchor baby more deserving of citizenship than a person who worked hard, went to school and developed skills useful to the US? I can't say, as I didn't write the laws. My guess is that US immigration law is designed to limit skilled immigration because educated Americans in white collar jobs can raise a bigger stink politically about H1B competition in high-wage industries than working class Americans can. As a foreign student who completed his undergrad education in the US, my student visa interview required me to show evidence that I would not try to use the F1 student visa to transition to H1B or a different visa class that can be linked to a green card application down the line. This is standard policy, as my friends who're also US-educated had the same questions during their interview. It's also difficult to enforce because once you're in the country and have completed your education, you can be recruited by a company who will sponsor your H1B, at which point the ICE will evaluate it as they would any other H1B application. So the whole rigmarole seems pointless to me, but that is bureaucracy for you.

foldr 11y ago

It's not really about the parent so much as the child. The child deserves to have parents that are present in its life.

yummyfajitas 11y ago
The parents can raise the child in their home country if that's an important concern. As far as I know, no country will deprive a child of citizenship simply because he was born while the parents were on vacation.
- foldr 11y ago
  Right, there's no chance of that being impractical or harmful to the child.
  - yummyfajitas 11y ago
    Of course it's harmful to the child. But there are millions of children born in various parts of the world who would suffer the same harms. Why should we protect a Mexican child who's parents crept across the border to give birth, but not an Indian child who's parents applied for immigration but were rejected? I feel like you are implicitly appealing to a very extreme version of the Copenhagen interpretation of ethics: http://blog.jaibot.com/the-copenhagen-interpretation-of-ethics/ http://blog.jaibot.com/the-copenhagen-interpretation-of-ethi...
    - foldr 11y ago
      The question isn't who we should protect, but who the US government should protect in the course of implementing its immigration policy. The Indian child is not a US citizen.
      - yummyfajitas 11y ago
        If you scroll up you'll see that we are discussing whether current policy is good, not what current policy actually is. "Is" != "aught".
        foldr 11y ago
        Yes, I know. I think that it is legitimate for the US government to prioritize the interests of US citizens in implementing and defining its immigration policy. After all, if it did not, the US would simply have open borders, and there is not much point in discussing that hypothetical.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]

rchaud 11y ago

>What makes the parents of an anchor baby more deserving of citizenship than a person who worked hard, went to school and developed skills useful to the US? I can't say, as I didn't write the laws. My guess is that US immigration law is designed to limit skilled immigration because educated Americans in white collar jobs can raise a bigger stink politically about H1B competition in high-wage industries than working class Americans can. As a foreign student who completed his undergrad education in the US, my student visa interview required me to show evidence that I would not try to use the F1 student visa to transition to H1B or a different visa class that can be linked to a green card application down the line. This is standard policy, as my friends who're also US-educated had the same questions during their interview. It's also difficult to enforce because once you're in the country and have completed your education, you can be recruited by a company who will sponsor your H1B, at which point the ICE will evaluate it as they would any other H1B application. So the whole rigmarole seems pointless to me, but that is bureaucracy for you.