The following is the text of the speech that won third prize in this year’s AG’s Cup Speech Competition.
I AM a product of birthright citizenship, alongside my older sister who is now pursuing higher education at Eastern Washington University. Our country was built on the concept of the “American Dream” and many have immigrated to our great nation of the United States of America in pursuit of that dream. But what happens when we undermine this very concept by setting borders beyond our reach? Birthright citizenship is a beacon of hope for those who are seeking to live out their “American Dream”…or at least pass that opportunity down to their children. And isn’t an opportunity to accomplish success a right afforded to us by our U.S. Constitution?
I stand here before you today to discuss birthright citizenship, where my roots are. Decades ago, my parents, both from the Philippines, met on Rota as CW-1 workers, dependent on their employment to stay here. They’ve been contributing to the economy and community. They built a home for themselves here and transitioned to having long-term residency, limiting them to work and reside in the CNMI. Thanks to their sacrifices and this policy, my sister and I are U.S. citizens. Following in their footsteps, my sister is now an upstanding citizen. I, too, strive to honor my parents through my academic and community achievements. The constitutional right of birthright citizenship made our American dream a reality. However, my story is not uncommon. Many in our community come from similar backgrounds. I can speak for many when I say that I am endlessly grateful for my parents and for this right, for giving me a greater chance to thrive.
To better comprehend what exactly is at stake: Birthright citizenship is based on the principles of jus soli — Latin for right of soil, wherein citizenship is acquired by place of birth, regardless of their parents’ citizenship. Jus sanguinis–Latin for right of blood, is the opposite, wherein a person’s citizenship is determined by their parents’ citizenship. Someone may gain U.S. citizenship through jus soli, like I have, or through jus sanguinis, or by being naturalized into the U.S.
As a Commonwealth under the United States, the CNMI has its own important legal backing for this right. Our CNMI Covenant, specifically Section 303, guarantees U.S. citizenship under jus soli for individuals born in the CNMI. This section of our covenant mirrors one that is found in the U.S. Constitution. The 14th Amendment states, and I quote, “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States.” [T]he 14th Amendment would grant U.S. citizenship to those born in the CNMI, with or without Section 303 of the Covenant. Birthright citizenship is not just a local right, it is a national, foundational, and constitutional guarantee.
Although birthright citizenship is vital to immigrant families who have made the United States and the CNMI their home, there are concerns surrounding those who may abuse the opportunity. Birth tourism or “anchor-babies” is a serious issue in the CNMI, where pregnant women come to give birth with the intent to secure U.S. citizenship for their child. According to Governor Arnold Palacios and the CNMI Health and Vital Statistics Office, birth tourism peaked in 2017 and 2018, with over 500 such births each year. The concern of this societal issue, in such a remote place like the CNMI, is that we lack the financial means to support quality and accessible healthcare for all. But could this issue be addressed by improvements in our immigration system? Rather than a permanent change to a foundational right?
Despite the systemic shortfalls that tempt people to take advantage of it, this policy has irrefutable benefits. It encourages people to settle in the CNMI and build families here, boosting our population, our contributing workforce, and strengthening our fragile economy. Recent threats to birthright citizenship have already caused a decline in our population, as seen in the CNMI. We receive federal funding for many of our programs, like education and healthcare, which are usually determined by population size. Ending birthright citizenship would bring a devastating ripple effect that we just can’t afford.
The solution is not to abolish the right in its entirety, nor would it be to continue without addressing its flaws. We can confront the real issues of birth tourism and even temporary-visa-abuse through stronger policies. This includes stricter border security and stricter visa policies for temporary visitors, such as imposing limits on late-term pregnant tourists. Policies already enforced in the mainland, like consular officers denying a tourist if they believe they are traveling for birth tourism, must be applied here to ensure that only contributing longtime immigrants and local residents will be able to earn birthright citizenship for their children.
Yet, under President Trump’s administration, birthright citizenship came under national threat. Recent executive orders led to brutal realities: children born in the U.S. to unauthorized immigrants, some being too young to fend for themselves, were forced to separate from their families or be deported. Trump’s previous administration’s “zero-tolerance policy” separated 5,349 recorded children from their immigrant families between March 2017 and November 2020, according to the online Congress database. While this is aimed at undocumented immigrants, the potential expansion of this policy might affect long-term, resident immigrants and more so their children who have constitutionally earned citizenship.
I witnessed firsthand the impacts of Trump’s executive order that he calls “Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship” when one of my classmates had his family’s life uprooted with this initiative. Though he was not born here, he’d been living here since the 6th grade, and his younger siblings are U.S. citizens. Rather than face the risk of being forcefully deported or possibly having their family separated, they chose to leave on their own. Unfortunately, my classmate’s story is not unique. Many immigrant families who have made this land their home as contributing citizens, were forced to abandon the homes they built and start all over again in a motherland that they may have been so far removed from already. Their lives were upended, not because they disobeyed the law, but because the interpretation of their rights changed.
It is even more important that we remember the original meaning behind jus soli. The 14th Amendment was originally passed to address racial discrimination by ensuring that formerly enslaved people, and all born in the U.S., would be recognized as U.S. citizens. Some part of that initial goal has been achieved. However, its purpose is far from exhausted. There is more to be gained by our nation and community through birthright citizenship. In sustaining it, we can protect and provide for our people while also standing up for equity and opportunity, values that our nation has been built upon.
In response to attacks on such a fundamental right, California Attorney General Rob Bonta challenged Trump’s administrative efforts. He himself, the son of an immigrant, defended the rights of immigrant children, stating “Just because he’s the president doesn’t mean he can change the U.S. Constitution.” He and other state attorney generals filed a multi-state lawsuit against Trump’s attempts to rewrite the law. Like California, the CNMI relies on a dedicated immigrant workforce, who deserve to see their hard work reflected in their children’s futures, just as my parents deserve.
Let me be frank…over 200 years ago, at the birth of our Constitution, our Framers gave slave-states 18 years to adjust their labor systems. There is no denying who our labor force relies on today…our immigrant population. It is 2025 and I’d think that the people that make up such a valued resource in our nation deserved more than a 30-day deadline, before their lives were forcefully changed forever.
This, begs the question: Do we tighten our ship that is piloted by birthright citizenship or do we ground it? Do we close the door on millions of immigrant families striving for their American Dream, with threats of deportation or worse? Or do we help them? What kind of future do we want for our people? The right decision can only be to honor a nation that has been built on the backs of our immigrants and to provide the proper resources and enforcement, to ensure, that such a constitutional right as birthright citizenship, is properly perpetuated by our nation’s history, present and future.
