Arguments made before the Supreme Court for birthright citizenship have been much like modern philosophy: a self-conscious intellectual exercise, bereft of clear thinking or common sense.

Section one of the 14th Amendment was written for one reason only—to ensure that individual states could not deny to freed slaves the rights that came with American citizenship: 

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. 

The Court’s Slaughter-House cases of 1873, although not primarily focused on citizenship, made it clear that the 14th Amendment specifically concerned recently freed blacks, not anyone else. Writing for the majority, Justice Samuel F. Miller said, 

It is so clearly a provision for that race and that emergency, that a strong case would be necessary for its application to any other.  

Because of the “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” clause, citizenship was not extended to children born to foreign diplomats residing in the U.S., to foreign visitors, or even to American Indians. In Elk v. Wilkins (1884), the Supreme Court ruled that a Winnebago named John Elk, even though he had moved off the reservation, was not a citizen of the U.S. since he was subject to the jurisdiction of his tribe, not the U.S. With certain exceptions, American Indians, although born in the United States, were not U.S. citizens until the Indian Citizenship Act of 1924.   

The case cited as establishing near-unrestricted birthright citizenship is U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark of 1898. Wong Kim was born in San Francisco to Chinese parents.  Years later, Wong Kim’s parents returned to China. Wong Kim remained behind and worked as a laborer. He eventually traveled to China to visit his parents, and upon his return to California, he was denied entry because, despite his birth in San Francisco, he was not considered a U.S. citizen. But then, the Supreme Court ruled that Wong Kim’s birth made him an American citizen.   

In writing for the majority, Justice Horace Gray had to twist and wiggle to justify overturning precedents from the Slaughter-House cases and Elk v. Wilkins. Most curious of all, Gray was the one who wrote for the majority in Elk, and he contradicts much of what he had earlier said in U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark. The principal thrust of his argument in Ark is that Ark’s Chinese parents had legally entered the U.S. and had been legal residents for years when Wong Kim was born. Gray didn’t seem concerned that Wong Kim’s parents were still foreign nationals and had not renounced their allegiance to China, which, as traditionally understood, would mean they were still subject to the jurisdiction of a foreign power.  

The court’s decision in U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark has been interpreted and expanded ever since, and now children born in the United States to illegal aliens or to foreigners here temporarily on work visas or to tourists are ipso facto American citizens. If the number of births in these categories were insignificant, as they had been before the mid-1960s, the absurdity of illegal aliens, temporary workers, and tourists giving birth to U.S. citizens under a misapplication of the 14th Amendment might not be of great importance. However, the numbers are huge and have transformed California’s population from nearly 90 percent (non-Hispanic) white in 1960 to less than 33 percent now. Call it the Great Replacement, Reconquista, or whatever you like, but it’s not a theory or a quest; it’s a fait accompli.

A little-discussed component of all this is Chinese birth tourism, which has become an industry in California. Chinese nationals, resident in California, have formed companies that facilitate pregnant Chinese women traveling to the United States and living in the Golden State until they give birth. Accommodations for pregnant Chinese range from simply adequate to luxurious, including exclusive beachfront homes with abundant amenities. This is all perfectly legal unless the pregnant woman lies on her visa application or to a customs agent at a port of entry. The U.S. government does not track the number of births to “tourists,” but a 2020 estimate from the Center for Immigration Studies put the number at 20,000-26,000 a year, with the large majority to Chinese nationals in California.

Birth tourism is not cheap. Companies involved in the business commonly charge $80,000 or more for their services, yet there are thousands of pregnant Chinese women champing at the bit to climb aboard a jetliner bound for the U.S. From the declarations of cash made to customs agents by these birth tourists, it would seem that, in the tradition of George Orwell’s Animal Farm, all Chinese communists are equal but some are more equal than others.  Examples of cash declarations recorded by customs agents can be found in a U.S. Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs’ report titled Birth Tourism in the United States:  

Subject is traveling with her husband for birth tourism with return ticket.…  Subject’s husband is traveling with $50,959.00 cash. 

The husband must have worn a money belt or carried an attaché case. But, how does one depart Communist China with 50 grand in cash?

Looking through the customs forms, I quickly learned that most were carrying even greater sums of paper currency, and several were here for the birth of a second child: “Subject is a physician in China traveling with wife (7 months pregnant). They are planning to have the 2nd child.… Declared $60,000 in cash.” Similarly: “Going for birth tourism. Already has two children born in the U.S. Plans to give birth in California. Brought proof of payment and hospital letters for first two children.”

Most startling of all were the pregnant women traveling alone with wads of cash.  “Subject disclosed birth tourism intent.  Subject is traveling with $155,000 USD cash.” The largest amount was recorded in a matter-of-fact manner reminiscent of Dragnet’s Sergeant Joe Friday: “Subject disclosed intent for birth tourism on visa application, carrying $301,400 USD for medical expenses.” That the customs agent’s entry was a single sentence with no comment suggests the agent found nothing particularly unusual about the amount of cash or the woman traveling alone. Aren’t stacks of greenbacks that exceed $300,000 something most of us associate only with drug trafficking?

Several Chinese birth tourism companies have run afoul of the law, including Star Baby Care, Ada International, You Win USA Vacation Services, and USA Happy Baby. Criminal charges include tax evasion, fraud, identity theft, and money laundering.

According to ICE, the companies coached their customers on how to pass the U.S. Consulate interview by falsely stating they would stay in the U.S. for only two weeks and how to hide a pregnancy by wearing loose-fitting clothing. They were also advised to lie on visa applications, to fly first to Honolulu, where customs enforcement was more relaxed than at LAX, and to use various dodges to avoid paying the full cost of birthing in California hospitals. 

Owned by Wen Rui Deng, Star Baby Care was probably the largest and most successful of the birth tourism companies operating in California before the ICE crackdown. Deng had 30 properties for her clients in Rowland Heights and another 10 in Irvine, including apartments, condos, and luxury homes. Her clients, or their husbands, included Chinese government officials and executives from Chinese Central Television, China Telecom, and the Bank of China. Deng disappeared, apparently with millions of dollars, before she could be arrested, and is thought to be in China.  

Another large birth tourism company based in California was USA Happy Baby, operated by Dongyuan Li, Michael Wei Yueh Liu, and Jing Dong. Charging up to $100,000 for their services, Happy Baby also had many wealthy customers. Their clientele has been tied to the Henan People’s Radio Station in Zhengzhou, the Public Security Bureau in Beijing, and Harbin Medical University.

Like most owners of birth tourism companies, Li, Liu, and Dong all became millionaires. Li, 41 years old at the time of her indictment in 2019, owned three multimillion-dollar homes in Irvine, evidently bought with cash, six vehicles, bank accounts with more than $1 million, and gold bars and coins in deposit boxes. Her husband, Qiang Yan, who was indicted on multiple counts of visa fraud, told authorities his wife’s money from birth tourism was “chump change,” bragging that he had more than $10 million in bank accounts in China. Just a young Chinese couple living the California dream!  

Creating American citizens from Chinese parents has recently entered a new phase. There are no laws prohibiting Chinese couples from having one of their fertilized eggs implanted in an American woman’s womb. Nine months later, out comes a new American citizen. 

Dozens of countries have outlawed this practice of international commercial surrogacy, but the United States has not. Unsurprisingly, California has several surrogacy agencies that cater to the Chinese, with websites in both English and Mandarin and second offices in China. Curious if there were any additional language options, I checked three prominent surrogacy agencies and found their services listed only in English and Mandarin. 

It’s not cheap to rent a womb. Global Fertility, with offices in Irvine and Beijing, lists $120,000-$140,000 for its services. Up to $80,000 of that goes to the surrogate mother. The Chinese, who often carry that much in cash for birth tourism, don’t seem phased by the cost. I found similar costs for Sunshine Surrogacy, with offices in Pasadena and Shanghai, and for Mlang Surrogacy, with offices in Los Angeles and Beijing.

Chinese birth tourism and birth surrogacy to gain U.S. citizenship are the consequence of a misapplication of the citizenship clause of the 14th Amendment, which was intended to do nothing more than prevent states from disenfranchising freed slaves by declaring them noncitizens. While brilliant legal minds endlessly manipulate the meaning of “subject to the jurisdiction thereof,” our country’s sovereignty is being trashed and our people replaced. ◆