GOP presidential candidates are now calling for a repeal of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, for being unconstitutional. OK. But let's say there never was a 14th Amendment. Would Donald Trump be a U.S. citizen today? Maybe, but maybe not.
Trump's paternal grandparents were both German immigrants. Were those grandparents citizens at the time Trump's father was born? Who knows. But if they weren't, then the only reason Trump's father is a "natural born" citizen is because it was guaranteed by the 14th Amendment. Without the 14th Amendment, no one can with certainty whether Trump's father ever would have been granted citizenship at all.
Marco Rubio's parents did not become naturalized citizens until 1975, four years after Rubio was born in 1971. Rubio, in effect, is the child of aliens. True, they were legal and "resident aliens," but they were aliens nonetheless. Does that make Rubio and "anchor baby?" Moreover, without the 14th Amendment it's questionable whether Rubio - a child born to aliens (legal or otherwise) - could be considered a "natural born" citizen and thus eligible to run for president.
All four of John Kasich's grandparents were immigrants, and so if not for the 14th Amendment the citizenship of Kasich's parents would not be automatically guaranteed either. Likely Kasich's parents would be eventually been naturalized, but again, there is no guarantee. And Kasich could himself ended up like Rubio--a child of parents whose citizenship status was, shall we say, "pending."
It's all silly, of course. America is not going to repeal the 14th Amendment due to the GOP's regularly scheduled fit of campaign-induced apoplexy. Many of the GOP candidates benefit from exactly the laws and policies they pretend to oppose.
But the GOP creates these kinds of senseless distractions every four years, like clockwork. Poppy Bush bashed Mike Dukakis with the Pledge of Allegiance. Obama was bashed for not wearing a flag pin. The GOP regularly trots out an anti-flag burning amendment to the constitution whenever they need an electoral boost.
It's all bluster, blather and bloviation. But it's the shiny new thing, and just like all the shiny new things before it, it's preoccupying the media because the GOP candidates keep harping on it. So sad that it works so well. Roaring from the dais about anchor babies becomes the minimum ante for presidential consideration, rather than demonstrating one's lack of fitness for office.
Then again, presidential elections have never really been about a sensible, civilized debate about the direction of the nation. John Quincy Adams made hay out of Andrew Jackson's illegitimate marriage. William Henry Harrison campaigned on being a hard-drinking everyman who loved log cabins - the 1840s equivalent of today's gun-loving, ranch-dwelling conservative.
We just have to accept the fact that politicians are followers, not leaders. They see an opening and they go for it. More important than what it says about them, is what it says about us that we put up with it and elect these windbags to high office.