Talk:Anchor baby

Article has a grossly Pro-immigrant & US-centric bias

Anchor Baby is not a term solely used to describe the behaviour of Latinamerican families in the US. It is also a term to describe Chinese and African Birth Tourism in Canada, Australia, France, etc. The article also immediately opens up with a WP:UNDUEWEIGHT machine-gun fire of WP:TOOMANYCITATIONS of pro-immigrant Editorials in liberal or pro-immigration leaning Newspapers followed by dubious language trying to cast doubt over whether the phenomenon actually exists (it does), creating a breach of WP:NPOV by painting the word as some kind of racist derogatory word in line with phrases like "currymuncher", "beaner", etc. which is false and a blatant sign that the writer likely had an agenda to push.

Fadendra1 (talk) 05:36, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

Agreed. The controversy section is one sided, citing trivial "non-PC" cases of the presumed offences. Zezen (talk) 11:02, 1 February 2019 (UTC)

Residency Requirement

The first sentence of the 14th Amendment explicitly requires legal residency, this has been pointed out by many, and was reaffirmed in the 1898 Supreme Court decision. Wikipedia should make this clear. Illegal immigrants do not have legal residency and so are not covered by the 14th Amendment.47.201.182.47 (talk) 13:50, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

I'm not a lawyer or particularly focused on this, but the above piqued my interest enough for me to dig up "the Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment expressly equates citizenship only with simple residence" in Zobe v Williams (457 U.S. 55 (1982)) and "The Fourteenth Amendment's Citizenship Clause expressly equates citizenship with residence, Zobel, 457 U. S., at 69" in Saenz v. Roe (526 U.S. 489 (1999)). Since I went to the trouble of digging that up, I thought I would link those cites here for ease of reference. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 19:33, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

Additionally, Plyler v. Doe (1982), dealing with the right to public education of children who were brought illegally into the US — the Supreme Court said in this case that 14th Amendment "jurisdiction" was essentially equivalent to physical presence and was not conditioned on having entered the US legally. As for Wong Kim Ark, our current understanding of "illegal immigration" was mostly unknown in 1898, and most (though admittedly not all) legal scholars who have written/spoken on this case have opined that it applies both to legal and to illegal immigrants; see the section "Wong Kim Ark and children of illegal aliens" in the Wong Kim Ark article. — Richwales (no relation to Jimbo) 21:48, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

Babies of foreign aliens are not US Citizens, Senator Reverdy Johnson said it here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacob_M._Howard#Speech_on_the_proposed_14th_Amendment Note Wong was OK because his father had legal residency. Note also the Plyler vs Doe ruling was only in so much as schooling illegal children is concerned. Anchor Babies of aliens are therefore not citizens. 47.201.182.47 (talk) 04:03, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

"Drop and leave" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Drop and leave. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 August 14#Drop and leave until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Hog Farm _Bacon 15:06, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

Add comments by Tom Homan?

Tom Homan suggested that VML and the two other children who are American citizens who were deported are anchor babies with actually using the term. What do you think about adding that to the Usage section? From the NYT:

But the administration has stood firm. “Having a U.S. citizen child after you enter this country illegally is not a get-out-of-jail free card,” Mr. Homan said. A spokeswoman for the Department of Homeland Security, Tricia McLaughlin, said on Sunday that it was common for parents who face deportation to want to be removed with their children, noting that the mother of the 2-year-old had made that choice.

i know you're a dog 20:22, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

Giving examples

The Natural-born-citizen clause (United States) article lists several politicians who were born in the United States but, at the time of each politician's birth, neither of their parents was a US citizen. As such, these people would be considered anchor babies, yes? This list includes Kamala Harris, Marco Rubio, Nikki Haley, and Bobby Jindall, all of whom hoped to serve as President of the United States. Should we add them to the present article as examples? —Quantling (talk | contribs) 00:48, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

I've boldly added a short paragraph to the end of Anchor baby § Incidence. —Quantling (talk | contribs) 15:58, 12 July 2026 (UTC)

U.S. Senator vs. U.S. senator Lindsey Graham

A question: in trying to follow the advice in MOS:JOBTITLE for the sentence In investigating a claim by U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham, PolitiFact found mixed evidence to support the idea that citizenship was the motivating factor., is the use of "U.S. Senator" an instance of using Senator Graham's name with his title, in which case it is an uppercase "S", or is it a description of the job he holds, in which case it should be U.S. senator Lindsey Graham, with a lowercase "s"? I think the former, but I'm not the only one out here. What do you think? @Wamalotpark —Quantling (talk | contribs) 16:37, 16 December 2025 (UTC)

Lowercase. Look at the MOS:JOBTITLES in green under Modified or reworded, denoting a description.

• "Mao met with US president Richard Nixon in 1972."

If it didn't have U.S. in front of it, or any modifier, such as "former", "then", "Republican", and was just "Senator Lindsey Graham" then it would be capitalized. Wamalotpark (talk) 22:09, 16 December 2025 (UTC)

If it said "wealthy senator Lindsey Graham", I'd be with you, but the guy's title is "U.S. Senator", as in he easily could have a nameplate on his desk and office door that say "U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham". Let's see what other editors think. In the meantime, please restore this in the article to where it was before this dispute started. —Quantling (talk | contribs) 01:48, 17 December 2025 (UTC)

I literally gave an example from the Manual of Style (MOS:JOBTITLES) that includes "US" in the example. The title is Senator. You don't address someone in conversation by saying "Hello US Senator Graham" or "Hello US President Trump"... you say "Hello President Trump". @Eyer please help explain if you'd like. Wamalotpark (talk) 02:00, 17 December 2025 (UTC)

In green directly from MOS:JOBTITLES as the correct format:

-----Mao met with US president Richard Nixon in 1972.------ Wamalotpark (talk) 02:08, 17 December 2025 (UTC)

The title is “Senator”. If we’re talking about a state senator, then “state” modifies “senator”, and “senator” should be lowercase. Likewise, if we’re talking about a U.S. senator, then “U.S.” modifies “senator”, and “senator” should be lowercase. @Wamalotpark’s example from MOS:JOBTITLES should make this clear. “U.S.” is a modifier if it precedes a title. —Eyer (he/him) If you reply, add {{reply to|Eyer}} to your message. 02:28, 17 December 2025 (UTC)

I've started a discussion at this talk page. —Quantling (talk | contribs) 18:15, 17 December 2025 (UTC)