Should foreign citizens be given U.S. citizenship because their parents decided to visit Disney World?

Over the next several days, we are encouraging the public to press their Members of Congress to answer the following question:

{text} for foreign tourists, students, guest workers and illegal aliens.

This automatic citizenship isn’t something required by the Constitution as many mistakenly assume. But it IS part of the vast, complex set of federal immigration statutes. Congress can change this incongruous practice at any time by passing a new law, such as Beyond the usual silliness of the language police, they were just plain wrong in claiming that giving birthright citizenship to the babies of foreign citizens didn’t anchor their parents in this country. Federal immigration agents have long told us that having a U.S. citizen child makes it much more difficult for an illegal alien to be run all the way through the removal process. That has been true under Presidents Bush (the 1st), Clinton (the 1st?), Bush (the 2nd) and Obama.

But Pres. Obama last fall greatly increased the benefits of being an anchor baby’s parents.

He had already established in 2012 that he would defy the constitutional separation of powers and declare an amnesty for young adult illegal aliens (so-called “Dreamers”) who had been brought here at a young age by their parents.

{text} and would return them to just being the children of foreign citizens who would be expected to take their full family back home with them, just like any other civilized family would be expected to do – and just like is expected in most countries around the world where babies take the citizenship of their parents, not from the soil where their mothers happened to give birth.

Let’s get some votes to find out where each elected official stands. If birthright citizenship for visitors and illegal aliens is allowed to continue, we will see anchor babies used as an excuse for new mass amnesties every decade or so forever.

ROY BECK is Founder & President of NumbersUSA