Rep. Nydia Velazquez (D-NY), gave an interview at El Nuevo Dia that helps to crystallize the controversy over the “End Birthright Citizenship in the Territories” law. The law requires one parent of a baby born in Puerto Rico to be a U.S. citizen or legal permanent resident before the baby is eligible for birthright citizenship. Many people see this as a sensible way to avoid giving citizenship to children of illegal immigrants who should not be on U.S. soil anyway. On the other hand, the law can also be seen as a dangerous threat to birthright citizenship for Puerto Rican families legally living in Puerto Rico — and to the stability of U.S. citizenship for Puerto Rico.
It’s about statutory citizenship
“ Congress granted U.S. citizenship to Puerto Ricans and later made it automatic at birth,” Velazquez points out. “Birthright citizenship for Puerto Ricans is vulnerable because it comes from a law, not the Constitution.”
In 1917, the Jones-Shafroth Act gave U.S. citizenship to everyone living in Puerto Rico at the time, unless they chose to keep the citizenship of another nation (usually Spain). TheNationality Act of 1940 confirmed birthright citizenship for Puerto Rico and conferred U.S. citizenship on anyone who had missed the chance in 1917.
The 14th Amendment of the Constitution lays out birthright citizenship for everyone born in a state. The Supreme Court determined that this birthright citizenship is protected by the Constitution and cannot be canceled by an executive order or by a new law contradicting the Constitution. But U.S. citizenship in the territories is not protected by the Constitution. it exists because of laws passed in Congress and can therefore be changed by new laws passed by Congress.
What next?
The “End Birthright Citizenship in the Territories” law has only a slim chance of becoming law. But Velazquez — as well as many other observers — sees possible future consequences. Velazquez also sees a more complex motivation in Washington.
“They are looking for new ways to circumvent the Supreme Court ruling,” she said. “In line with this effort, President Trump is determined to revoke U.S. citizenship for as many people as possible. Abolishing birthright citizenship in the territories is not a fringe idea in this administration.”
Discussions of U.S. citizenship for an independent Puerto Rico often center on the idea or emotional claim that Congress just wouldn’t revoke Puerto Ricans’ citizenship, even though of course they legally can. A bill titled “End Birthright Citizenship in the Territories” makes it clear that at least some members of Congress would be open to it.
There have been other examples. Here are two typical statements:
- Rep. Tom Tiffany (R-WI): “If the people of Puerto Rico want to be independent, that means there is no special treatment and no special benefits.”
-
Rep. Bruce Westerman (R-AR) : “The United States has laws that determine how citizenship is granted. Extending U.S. citizenship to those born in a sovereign foreign nation to non-U.S. citizens would be unprecedented…The people of Puerto Rico should understand what choosing independence or sovereignty entails: that is, separation from the U.S. federal system and the related benefits.”
What this says about the relationship between the U.S. and Puerto Rico
“That Washington can still treat Puerto Rican citizens with such insensitivity reveals the true situation of the island and its vulnerability to colonial and despotic rule,” Velazquez concluded.
It certainly knocks down the often-seen arguments that Puerto Rico has somehow gotten constitutional citizenship, incorporation, or other status changes over time through acclimatization or a de factor change in status.
