AZ Immigration Guru Targets “Anchor” Babies

Lawyer behind the “ID ’em” law wants to tackle birthright citizenship state by state.

<a href="http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Two_nurses_with_baby_in_nursery_at_Toronto_East_General_and_Orthopaedic_Hospital,_Toronto,_ON.jpg">Wikimedia</a>

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


Kris Kobach, the legal mastermind behind Arizona’s infamous immigration law, has a new target: birthright citizenship.

Sitting on an immigration panel at the American Conservative Union’s annual shindig, Kobach, who was recently sworn in as secretary of state in Kansas, told the CPAC crowd that he’s spearheading a new movement to eliminate guarantees of US citizenship for immigrant children born on American soil.

Kobach admits that such a proposal stands little chance on Capitol Hill, but he insists there’s an opening at the state level. He’s teaming up with the Immigration Reform Law Institute in an effort to encourage state legislation setting stricter parameters on who can become a state “citizen.”

Other foes of birthright citizenship have gone so far as to call for a Constitutional amendment, but Kobach sees a more promising path through the states, which he says have the authority to make “certain legal arrangements” that bear “the force of federal law.”

“We can’t change the way Congress define US citizenship, but we can conceive of ways to change how a state defines its own citizenship,” he told the crowd. And while he admitted that this was “maybe not the most important issue with regard to immigration,” he added that tearing down birthright citizenship was important if Americans wanted to remain faithful to their Constitution.

Republican leaders have sought to tamp down this inflammatory issue in the run-up to November 2012. Rep. Lamar Alexander (R-Texas), said he won’t make it a priority in the House Judiciary Committee, and he passed over Rep. Steve King of Iowa—a GOP flamethrower and avid birthright foe—for the chairmanship of Judiciary’s immigration subcommittee.

But Kobach and his fellow panelists made it clear on Thursday that the haters aren’t about to clam up. Panelist Mark Krikorian, executive director of the wonkish Center for Immigration Studies, proclaimed that his “skepticism” about the relevance of birthright citizenship was partly erased by a recent trip to the Arizona border. There he heard tell of a Mexican woman whose water broke as she was being lowered over the border fence. She gave birth to twins, Krikorian said. He went on to claim that the same woman had crossed the border a year earlier to have triplets. “This is an important issue,” he concluded.

The discussion evoked another hobbyhorse of the conservative fringe—the birther conspiracy theory. “Speaking of birth certificates, in some states, you can’t even find them!” joked panelist Dino Teppura of the Indian-American Conservative Council.

After the event, Teppura, a DC lawyer, told me that his concerns about Obama’s birth certificate weren’t just a joking matter. “Personally, I just don’t understand why they don’t put a copy of it somewhere on the Internet,” he said. “It would be a nonissue if I knew there was a copy somewhere.” He emphasized that he believes Obama was born in the US, and that Hawaii officials’ refusal to dig up a hard copy “is probably just a paperwork issue.”

Teppura added that he was born in Denmark before his parents came to America. Nevertheless, he shared the birthers’ concerns about lack of documentation, and he insisted that birthers have been demonized unfairly. “Just to question the presence or lack of it shouldn’t put you in the light of—you’re an extremist or you’re anti-Obama or something. It’s a reasonable thing just to say: Why can’t we just see a copy?”

Kobach is also known for cracking a few birther one-liners. At a 2009 GOP gathering, he joked that what Obama and God had in common was that neither had a birth certificate. But unlike Teppura, Kobach quickly objected to the notion that he was a birther. “Until a court says otherwise, I’ll assume he’s telling the truth,” he said.

Elsewhere at CPAC, immigration hawkishness and birther humor also went hand in hand. On Thursday morning, freshman Rep. Raul Labrador (R-Idaho)—a Puerto Rican, anti-amnesty conservative—delivered the event’s first official joke on the topic. “I was fortunate enough to be an American citizen by birth and I have the birth certificate to prove it,” he told the crowd.

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate