{"id":22682,"date":"2026-04-04T02:45:29","date_gmt":"2026-04-04T02:45:29","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/nationalgunowner.org\/index.php\/2026\/04\/04\/anchor-baby-schemes-are-thriving-and-the-system-making-it-possible-is-still-untouched\/"},"modified":"2026-04-04T02:45:29","modified_gmt":"2026-04-04T02:45:29","slug":"anchor-baby-schemes-are-thriving-and-the-system-making-it-possible-is-still-untouched","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/nationalgunowner.org\/index.php\/2026\/04\/04\/anchor-baby-schemes-are-thriving-and-the-system-making-it-possible-is-still-untouched\/","title":{"rendered":"\u2018Anchor Baby\u2019 Schemes Are Thriving And The System Making It Possible Is Still Untouched"},"content":{"rendered":"


\n<\/p>\n

\n

The following is an edited transcript excerpt from The Michael Knowles Show<\/a>.<\/span><\/em><\/p>\n

* * *<\/p>\n

A huge proportion of babies born in the United States are now born to foreign nationals who are cheating the immigration system.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Can we acknowledge this whole \u201canchor baby\u201d thing is a problem? I should hope so but I\u2019m not totally sure that we can.<\/span><\/p>\n

The whole concept of birthright citizenship comes from the British. The idea stems from a distinction between jus soli<\/em> \u2014 the right-of-the-soil \u2014 and jus sanguinis<\/em> \u2014 the right-of-blood. The notion that you get your citizenship from the blood of your parents versus receiving citizenship because you were born on certain soil.<\/span><\/p>\n

Well, we get the idea from English common law. And guess what? The English \u2014 the Brits \u2014 have not had jus soli<\/em>, right-of-the-soil birthright citizenship, since 1983. So even they recognized there\u2019s a problem.<\/span><\/p>\n

Can we too recognize that there\u2019s a problem here?<\/span><\/p>\n

\"DailyWire+\"<\/a><\/p>\n

Western Lensman gives some very good background on this topic on X, posting a clip about pregnant mothers from Turkey giving birth in the United States. Here\u2019s the clip:<\/span><\/p>\n

\n

2020. Turkish anchor baby ring found operating in Long Island, NY \u2014 mothers got taxpayer funded healthcare.<\/p>\n

This is insane:<\/p>\n

\u201cProsecutors say more than 100 pregnant women from Turkey came here to give birth, so their children were instantly granted U.S. citizenship.\u201d\u2026 https:\/\/t.co\/mjxyihjeO2<\/a> pic.twitter.com\/QcWl50rEXd<\/a><\/p>\n

\u2014 Western Lensman (@WesternLensman) April 2, 2026<\/a><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Source: WesternLensman\/X.com<\/p>\n

There are \u201canchor baby\u201d operations \u2014 what amount to birth tourism schemes \u2014 that have been operating in this country for years. Prosecutors described a case on Long Island where more than 100 pregnant women from Turkey came to the U.S. to give birth so their children would automatically receive U.S. citizenship.<\/span><\/p>\n

\n

The defendants fraudulently facilitated the births in the United States of approximately 119 Turkish children. And those children now hold birthright U.S. citizenship.<\/span><\/em><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Officials alleged the scheme was openly advertised abroad \u2014 essentially marketing the idea: if you want your child to be born in the United States and become an American citizen, this is how you do it.<\/span><\/p>\n

This is a business. This is an industry.<\/span><\/p>\n

You see versions of this in other countries too \u2014 there were similar cases involving Chinese birth tourism operations in the past.<\/span><\/p>\n

So, again I ask, can we acknowledge that this is a problem?<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n

Yes.<\/span><\/p>\n

Where does the problem derive from? It derives from what is now an outmoded conception from English common law \u2014 so much so that the English themselves moved away from it \u2014 and from interpretations of the 14th Amendment that have been expanded far beyond what some argue was originally intended.<\/span><\/p>\n

So what\u2019s the solution?<\/span><\/p>\n

The solution, very obviously, would be to place limits on how birthright citizenship is applied. You don\u2019t necessarily have to eliminate it entirely \u2014 you could define it more narrowly. Some argue that even within the text of the 14th Amendment there are grounds for interpretation about who qualifies, since the phrase \u201csubject to the jurisdiction thereof\u201d has historically been debated.<\/span><\/p>\n

That\u2019s the argument.<\/span><\/p>\n

And the broader point is this: if a country cannot define who is and is not a citizen, then it raises serious questions about sovereignty and governance.<\/span><\/p>\n

That\u2019s why this debate keeps coming up.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n