Essay #3: Birthright Citizenship in the USA

Essay #3: Birthright Citizenship in the USA Name Institutional Affiliation Essay #3: Birthright Citizenship in the USA As far as the debate on birthright citizenship in the USA is concerned, Will Wilkinson and Margaret Stock provide diverse perspectives that not only provide insight, but also explore the breadth of the issue. In this way, these two essays provide valuable context and insight into the debate on whether birthright citizenship in the USA should be eliminated or not. According to Wilkinson, birthright citizenship should be eliminated. This, according to him, serves as a valuable precursor to establishing a common labor market with open mobility across Mexico, the USA, and Canada (Wilkinson, 2010). In this way, these countries can benefit from the diversity of a multinational workforce contributing towards the economy without having to incur the challenges and costs of conferring citizenship status to said workers. Wilkinson, however, contends that abolishing birthright citizenship and subsequently establishing a common labor market will need a constitutional amendment, and it is this effort to propose a sound amendment that is essential to settling this debate (Wilkinson, 2010). On the other hand, Stock posits that birthright citizenship should not be abolished in the USA. She argues that by abolishing citizenship by birth (jus soli), the USA inadvertently open itself up to having millions of stateless individuals that will find it difficult or impossible to prove their citizenship by blood (jus sanguinis) as required by law (Stock, 2007). In this sense, abolishing citizenship by birthright serves predominantly to create more problems than it solves. At the same time, Stock also argues that conferring citizenship by birthright is a good law and one that has defined America since its inception and m...