Hang in there AllieBean. If commenters are making specious arguments or false accusations, please add your two cents. I appreciate your informed commentary and like to hear all sides of an issue.
Of course some will react immediately with outrage, even if the article is selectively reported and lacking in detail. The reason I come to TPM is to get a well-rounded discussion. As they say, don’t let the turkeys get you down.
Thanks, Clemmers. I just worry it’s going to get nothing but worse as the elections get closer.
@Bardi, do you really think Mexico would accept Texas back, in anything like its current form?
They claim that not being able to obtain birth certificates for their children has made their kids second-class citizens,
Coincidence? I think not.
I agree; you do need a break. This has been going on since 2008. If something were to be done about it, it would have happened. You’re trying to read some kind of rationale into a situation that doesn’t merit it. It just doesn’t.
In some ways, this reminds me of the whole garbage with voter ID. Since 2008, the state of Texas has NOT figured out a “workaround” over this. It. is. bullsh*t. I’m not rationalizing this. Just no.
Goodbye.
This is just a back door way for them to “deny” citizenship to these babies. Typical right-wing tactic - can’t win on policy, use some dirty tactic to achieve the same thing.
They will. People become more impassioned, and all political blogs start drawing a bigger crowd, which usually includes a number of lesser informed people with an opinion dying to be expressed.
Don’t let it get to you, though. I think it helps to understand that we, ourselves, are also getting more passionate about the elections as they get closer. It’s human nature. Just take a deep breath, step away fora few minutes, and be like the duck and let the water just roll off.
Besides, if actual lawyers aren’t around to correct me, just imagine the damage I could do 
But that is a distinction without difference. In practice, if you cannot access your birth certificate, if questioned, you cannot prove you are an American citizen.
Correct. But that also goes to my point above. I am in that situation (I was born in Canada while my father was stationed up there in the Air Force). I recently relocated to Florida while my foot is healing, and got a Florida Driver Licence and registered to vote. I had to show all sorts of certifications, including my birth cerfticate, the certificate that proved I was granted US Citizenship because my father was in the service and out of the country at my birth, and letters from the US embassy at the time. (Yeah, even for Canada). All of that however, is based upon that original birth certificate, without which, none of it is accepted.
So if a birth certificate is withheld, the state is definitely refusing to grant the baby US citizenship. Technically, they can say they aren’t, but without providing the documentation, they are. Without a copy of that, they will be refused a Passport, a Social Security card, eventually a drivers license and of course a voter registration card.
The problem with matriculas, however, is that regardless of how shoddy a job that Mexico does in verifying them, they ARE official Mexican identification for Mexicans living outside of Mexico. They are used for countless legal documents as verification of identity, including many legal documents involving interactions with citizens of this country. Marriages, trade contracts, etc. If Texas is allowed to reject IDs for this specific reason, it seems to me they have to reject them for all reasons, which invalidates each and every document that relies upon them. And that’s going to be much, much bigger headache for Texas.
Just last September, Congress voted down a measure preventing their use by US financial institutions. So, the US Congress has accepted that they are acceptable for conducting business. Many (if not most?) other countries allow their use, Peru for example, specifically cited their acceptance by the US Government as the reason they accept them.
And they have been in use for something like 150+ years. So it does seem raising a question about why they are a concern now, for this specific usage, is now a problem.
Texas: Born in the USA? Doesn’t matter, if you look like a Mexican we’ll FORCE you to become an undocumented “illegal”.
It’s not, legally, because what it means is that TX will be forced to correct this problem at some point by the courts. These children still have their citizenship and that is why TX will not be permitted to continue with this behavior. Texas will be made at some point, to figure out a fix. It will probably wind its way all the way up the ladder, but the fact that they still have their citizenship is what will allow them to eventually win. Of course it sucks in the mean time for all the immigrants just trying to get by.
We should all be familiar with this practice, find a legal loophole and exploit it. There is a legitimate legal loophole in regards to the foreign documentation and there is no question Texas exploited it, but that’s how the system works. It happened with the ACA and that’s what will provide TX their short term win.
I’m not arguing that what they are doing is right (because they could have fixed this long ago…as could the State Dept, who I hold much more responsible), I’m arguing that the Judge is right. The Judge, however, if you read the opinion, laid out the appeal FOR the immigrants. Until the Judge ruled, the only question was whether Texas had to accept the particular documentation issued by the Mexican government. NOW the question becomes the denial of rights of citizenship. The legal process is infuriating and it’s incremental. It also will now, as appeals wind their way through, encompass the other states that refuse to recognize the same documentation, like Arizona (although they have a workaround, but I’m unfamiliar with how viable it is).
Sometimes Judges issue their rulings to force a bigger decision on the merits. We saw that with the ACA (on the dark side, if you will) and we’ve seen it with gay marriage.
No, citizenship is a legal status. The lack of issuance of a document does not affect this constitutional status. The problem is in the ability to execute rights granted to citizens and that’s a huge problem. I haven’t argued otherwise. The fact that these kids have their citizenship and TX is getting in the way of their ability to execute those rights is what will allow those children to prevail in the future. TX is taking the short win for the long term loss. This case will wind its way up the courts and anti-immigration folks will take a huge loss because the courts will end up repeatedly (or at least at the SC level) reaffirming citizenship by birthright.
That’s a legitimate point that may be argued on appeal. I’d have to read this law, however, to fully understand it.
I understand, but these are really different times and something needs to be done about the documentation. It should have been done long ago between the two countries. If the State Dept gets on it, then they could solve the problem even before it winds through the courts. I think the courts, however, present a stronger immigration victory…
I understand and appreciate the legal analysis and the fine points you refer to. Still, the fact remains that in real life these babies will run into all sorts of difficulties once they are no longer babies.
Just imagine that one of them might run for president 50 years down the road. Considering all the birther nonsense since 2008: how would their descendents react to a candidate with a Spanish name (!) who cannot produce a proper birth certificate (!!) while running? How is this not violating the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth?
I think everyone is missing the point. The judge did NOT rule that Texas can keep denying birth certificates to Mexican immigrants born in Texas. The judge denied an motion for emergency application of a temporary injunction. Basically, the Judge agreed with the Plaintiff, but said the Defendants had some legitimate points and that a pre-suit injunction shouldn’t be applied and that the case should move forward to trial.
That does not mean that he’s ruling for Texas or that Texas will win at trial, just that they couldn’t be knocked out of the game with an emergency temporary injunction.
[quote=“Dave_MB, post:32, topic:27844”]
Yes, this is totally right. I got way drawn into the weeds of how this will likely all unfold.
Think of the millions of matriculas the American consulate would have to issue!
…and it was a good analysis as well.