While I would personally love for Korea to get a waiver interviews for tourist visas (to avoid the hassle of going to the embassy), I don’t think it will happen anytime soon.
Exhibit A (Chosun):
Police have busted 42 prostitutes for using forged documents to get a U.S. visa. Police in Seoul also detained a broker identified as Kim (47) on charges of faking a variety of documents to help them get the visas.
According to police, Kim and his Korean-American accomplice had been mocking up bank account records, job certificates and Family Register documents for their clients and training them for the visa interviews since September 2004, charging W4 million (US$1=W928) per person. The two made profits of W1 billion in all by doing so. Half of their 500 clients succeeded in getting a U.S. visa. Their clients included mostly 20-something women who wanted the visa to work in the sex trade in large U.S. cities. Kim, one of the women, told police the number of customers here dropped after new anti-prostitution laws were introduced two years ago, and word is that prostitutes can earn at least US$10,000 a month in the U.S.
Can you be charged for human trafficking if you are trafficking yourself?
That same piece has exhibit B:
“The number of cases where the U.S. Embassy seizes forged visa application documents rose to 200 a month. This is a serious stumbling block to Koreans being included in the U.S. visa waiver program.”
Another problem is shady travel agents who try to get their clients into the State’s on false pretenses. On at least two occasions, travel agents have tried to get our students going to the US to study to apply for tourist visas rather than the appropriate J visas because the former requires less time and work to get. Needless to say, we took our business elsewhere.
On behalf of all the people who have to wait outside the embassy for over an hour to get their visa interviews, thank you.
37 Comments
And on the heels of that,comes this
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/200.....titutes_dc
That’s at least one fewer BMW on Yongsan. Good riddance.
The odd thing to me is that I have heard directly from quite a few adjuma that complain about the sexual abilities of their husbands and I was not asking for that information either since I consider it to be a bit too personal for polite conversation.
Perhaps this is another example of how public education of health issues has been once again neglected by education and public health officials.
As for visas for Koreans, sex touring or will be an ever-growing concern with the continued downturn in the economy, here in Korea (Damn the Uridang and Kim Dae Jung’s Millenium party). I see a great increase in stickers and tiny ads, all over, for loan sharks and part-time work.
“On behalf of all the people who have to wait outside the embassy for over an hour to get their visa interviews, thank you.”
Yeah, and thank you for making it so that my family and I couldn’t drive into Maine this summer to go sightseeing even though we were only 500 m away.
The US need to face the fact that these women aren’t “victims”, but are in fact, criminals. They need to be given the same stiff prison sentences that the pimps and the traffickers should get. Until then, you’ll see a continued increase of hookers fleeing Korea (at least it’s one sign that the crackdown on prostitution is working somewhat).
Blackmarkets exist because of a demand that cannot be accomodated through normal channels.
Drop the visa requirement for Koreans to visit the US and there will no longer be a blackmarket for forged this and mocked that.
It’s that simple.
From where I sit I’m dead set against visa waivers for Korea. Trafficking of Korean women in the US is huge (including ’self-trafficked’). It’s also the same for Taiwanese women. I lived in LA for three years during law school and a great portion of the sex-worker industry there, particularly massage parlors, KTVs, and ‘hostess’ clubs are staffed by Korean or Taiwanese women, by far the majority of whom enter the US legally on tourist visas. It’s something I don’t think a lot of people want to confront or admit.
It’s the same in any large US city. The volume of these women must number in the thousands. Without the visa process, which lets us stop some, it will only increase.
Then again, there are the huge numbers of women from Taiwan and Korea who travel to the US on tourist visas just to give birth. Without a visa procedure, those numbers will mushroom as well. I’m curious as to what other Americans think about this.
That reminds me of something Roy, how many women actually travel to the U.S. on tourist visas to give birth. I have heard before from some people that these so called anchor babies are a significant problem. Then again, I have also heard at the same time from others that the actual figure is not altogether high relative to the total number of visas.
Jing,
no one knows for sure. My guess is several thousand per year from Taiwan alone, and even more for South Korea. Besides making a mockery of the 14th Amendment, there are numerous policy issues involved. I’m curious what other Americans think about this issue, because it’s happening. A lot.
An undocumented worker from Mexico has filed a lawsuit in order to remain in the United States with her US-born son. She alleges that her pending deportation forces her 7-year-old son to choose between exercising his right as a US citizen to remain in his country of birth or going to Mexico with his mother.
Minor children cannot sponsor their parents for citizenship. They do,however, avail themselves of the benefits of US citizenship. About half of the Korean ESL students I taught in a previous public school in Illinois were native born US citizens growing up in Korean families in Korea. They came to the US to take advantage of free public education in English, living either with one parent or with a local Korean host family. In my current job, my students are all Hispanic. Some are undocumented; others were born here to undocumented parents. Many live in poverty, partially fed by cheese, beans, and milk obtained with WIC coupons and free public school breakfasts and lunches. Undocumented workers are ineligible for government assistance but often receive badly needed help from private organizations. Their US-born children are immediately eligible at birth for WIC and other public benefits. Many Americans may not realize this, but undocumented workers do pay taxes - social security, sales, and property taxes directly through home ownership or indirectly through rent.
So many of the parents of my students work in construction, and with the new housing market tanked, I wonder if they will stay in the community, go elsewhere, or return home.
Like Roy, I strongly favor an amendment requiring that at least one parent have permanent residency or citizenship. I also favor a guest-worker program. Canada’s new program has proven very successul. Migrants come for a couple of years, save money, and return home to their families.
I’ve heard estimates of over a quarter million anchor babies annually are delivered in the US with over 5000 of them coming from South Korea. It is unbelievable that this continues to go on. I recommend that we come to equal terms with South Korean policy where one parent must be a citizen for a baby born here to get citizenship. There seems to be at least one bill or resolution per year put up to stop this, but it continues. The best thing you can do is to write to your representative and let them know you are opposed to this.
I did see that the birthinusa.com site, which basically sets up the prenatal, delivery and postnatal care is now
downmoved to another address that I haven’t found yet.A bill or resolution isn’t enough. Citizenship at birth is a right guaranteed by the fourteenth amendment. A new amendment would be necessary.
It may be too much to ask to change the Constitution: that would be very hard to do. I certainly would like to see Congress write a law saying that having a child in the US is prima facie evidence of immigrant intent so at least we could prevent the women who have kids on tourist visas from doing it again and again. I’ve seen cases where women have had three or more kids this way.
The 14th Amendment does NOT guarantee citizenship to a child born in the US to foreign citizens. The anchor babies are beneficiaries of a Congressional enactment - the first iteration of which goes back to the 1780s - that can be changed by simple legislation, and should be.
Why? What are the great evils which have been inflicted on America by bestowing citizenship on such children? Something smells rotten about these sentiments …
Sperwer,
That is merely your interpretation of the 14th. Legal precedence would seem to suggest that such children are (except in the cases of diplomats and a couple of others), and precedence has certainly treated them as such.
About the only thing that could change that was if the Supreme Court were to interpret ’subject to the jurisdiction…’ differently than it and other courts have done in the past.
Simple legislation could not change it; such a law would certainly be challenged and in the end the Supreme Court would have to decide.
I still think the far easier route would be for Congress to determine that giving birth to a child in the US is prima facie evidence of immigrant intent, thus permitting us to make sure these women would not easily get tourist visas again.
The Fourteenth Amendment reads:
Court cases have interpreted this amendment to exclude the children of diplomats, since they are not “under the jurisdiction of the United States.” In the 1975 Plyler VS. Doe case, which opened the doors of public education to undocumented children, the Supreme Court stated in its ruling that illegal immigrants are “under the jurisdiction of the United States.” The Court did not directly address the citizenship of so-called “anchor babies,” but implied that such children qualify for citizenship.
Arizona Representative Robert Stump introduced H.R. 190 in 2001, which reads:
It would be interesting to hear Brendon weigh in on the constitutionality of this bill. This bill or any like it would certainly be challenged all the way to the Supreme Court. I’m not a lawyer, but thus far, interpretation has hinged on the key phrase “under the legal jurisdiction of the United States.”
wow! 5000 anchor babies? wow! that’s a serious problem compared to to the two or three million mexicans who come here illegally every year. or perhaps, it’s just a problem for the lil expat and his or her need for revenge. could that be it?
by the way, thousands and thousands of ho’s from korea and taiwan? who’s using these prostitutes? just korean men? yeah, right.
‘no one knows for sure. My guess is several thousand per year from Taiwan alone, and even more for South Korea. Besides making a mockery of the 14th Amendment, there are numerous policy issues involved. I’m curious what other Americans think about this issue, because it’s happening. A lot.’
i can’t speak for my fellow americans but i think this is a minor issue against the backdrop of illegal immigration from mexico. besides, the anchor babies produced by these korean women often go on to benefit our nation and our people. let’s focus on fixing our broken border to the south so that we americans won’t be speaking spanish one day.
thanks for asking.
pawi
How do you figure? If these children remain in the US or come back here as adults and contribute to the US economy as highly skilled tax-paying workers, then, yes, they do. If they take their education and skills back to Korea, then no, they don’t.
Bah, the taxes invested/wasted on these kids is just a drop in the ocean when you compare it to what’s invested/wasted in Iraq.
Yeah, let’s bar the door after the burglars have entered the house.
I don’t really disagree; it’s just that this strategy doesn’t deal with the persistent problem of the spores left behind.
And yeah, it is my interpretation of the 14th and the citizenship legislation- one that is shared by a lot of constitutional scholars. And, of course, in the end, it’s a matter to be decided by the Supremes - although you seem to have precious little understanding or respect for the fact that despite its being the final arbiter, the SC is just one of three branches, all of which have both the prerogative and the duty to make constitutional judgments. And while I’d be interested to hear Brendon’s take, too, I’m content to do my own analysis; I studied Con Law with Archie Cox.
So, as Sonagi correctly points out the crucial language is the phrase “under the jurisdiction of the United States”. The legislative history of both the Citizenship statutes and the 14th Amendment make it abundantly clear that no one ever thought that children born of foreign citizens in the US were under the jurisdiction of the United States for citizenship purposes (as compared with being citizens of the jurisdiction of their parents’ citizenship under all the traditional rules). Indeed, quite the contrary; it was precisely because so many of the original Americans and their native born children were (according to settled legal doctrine at the time) subjects of other sovereigns that the original citizenship legislation was deemed necessary. Congressman Stump’s bill simply affirms this established understanding. And as far as the issue of citizenship is concerned, the existing precedents, e.g. the dip kids cases cited by Sonagi, the Supreme Court is on board. The Pyler case dealt with access to public services, and thus is not dispositive. Despite its invocation of the magic phrase - which is mere dicta - the Pyler case is pretty easily distinguishable.
The Stump bill (comment #17) sounds like a fair shot. Pass it and run it by the Supremes.
pawikirogi,
I see no reason why we can’t increase enforcement along the border and try to prevent anchor babies.
in the end, as far as ‘judging’ or interpreting the Constitution, the fact that the Supreme Court is the final arbiter means it’s the only voice that really matters in a case like this, because if any bill like the one you prpopose were to pass, someone will file suit in federal court before the ink of the president’s signature has dried. Of course, Congress could always subsequently amend the 14th.
I think that is very unlikely. But maybe they, like you, think of these people as ’spores’. I don’t know if my solution would cut down on the number of tourist visa babies, but I think it’s worth a try, and it would be the quickest near-term approach since the court cases regarding the 14th would take years.
I say pass the legislation and let the games begin. Plaintiffs seeking a ruling of unconstitutionality may or may not get a stay of enforcement pending decision - my guess is not, so much the better.
PPOR.
Is
1.) Mexicans are massive contributors to the U.S. They pay taxes, buy houses, build independent businesses, etc. They are necessary.
Koreans get citizenship for their children so that they can get a free education and/or avoid military service. They are not invested as citizens to such an extent.
In order to be truly citizens as what I interpret the framers of the fourteenth amendment meant by “jurisdiction thereof” they would need to pledge their allegiance to the US, forsaking Korean citizenship (where it is illegal to have dual citizenship at any rate).
2.) Reducing Korean anchor babies and reducing immigration from Mexico are not mutually exclusive propositions. Both can and should be done.
Back on the topic of hookers, the Chosun Ilbo is reporting that the Ministry of Gender Equality and Family is bribing men with cash and gift certificates to stay away from sexually oriented entertainment during the holiday period:
http://english.chosun.com/w21d.....60035.html
‘they (illegal mexicans) are necessary.’
no, they are not. i remember a time when america didn’t have 11 million illegal mexican immigrants and the country got along just fine. perhaps, you can’t remember that time. illegal immigration is NOT necessary.
btw, the public hospital in my area is always teetering on the edge of bankruptcy because of uninsured illegal immigrants from mexico. tell me
something, ms judy. where’s all that mexican tax money you were talking about? it ain’t korean anchor babies straining american healthcare, my dear.
‘pawikirogi, I see no reason why we can’t increase enforcement along the border and try to prevent anchor babies.’
well, i do. you see, congress just recently passed a bill authorizing the building of a 700 hundred mile fence along the border with mexico. the problem is that congress didn’t fund it. you mean this country should undertake the process of changing an amendment to the constitution because of 5000 korean anchor babies while at the same time, refusing to spend a dime on an measure to stop illegal border crossings?
the two are not of equal weight. illegal immigration from mexico must be the priority. it must come first. it must come first because this nation must remain western in it’s culture and primarily european in it’s population.
And _I_ remember a time when there weren’t millions of Koreans living in the U.S., legally and not, and the country got along just fine.
In fact, it was quite pleasant.
Having Korean women stream by the tens of thousands to California to spawn like so many demented salmon is completely unnecessary.
Hey Marmot, you ask:
“Can you be charged for human trafficking if you are trafficking yourself?”
That’s a pretty good question. In the United States, the answer is YES. For example, there was a 15 year old girl who was arrested for child pornography who took photos of HERSELF and disseminated them. See:
http://www.usatoday.com/tech/w.....orn_x.htm0
The question remains.
Why would anyone WANT to go to Amerika?
Why?
RR
Spoiled little yank,
The Mexican and Salvadoran families whose children I teach used to live in concrete shacks with tin roofs. They barely fed themselves on $5 a day. Here their US-born children are eligible for free milk, cheese, beans, and other foods; local private charitable groups help very desperate families, like the ailing father of one of my students, by donating clothing and paying heating bills. One father saved up for five years in order to pay a coyote to pose as his children’s uncle and ferry them here by plane, a safer and more comfortable journey than the desert crossing made by the child’s classmates.
Happy in Singapore? Stay there. There are millions eager to take your place.
There are no illegal Koreans abroad in other countries. Despite the fact that the Korean gov’t estimated that there were about 300,000 illegal Koreans in the US alone. However, the gov’t said this because the Japanese and Americans made them say it! These Koreans never need to use the host country’s hospitals because they eat kimchi which cures everything. That’s why Koreans never get sick or catch colds, it’s all because of kimchi…disease free Koreans for sure. Remember, Korea is the only country in the world that attracts illegal immigrants/workers. Koreans never break the laws of other countries they may be in because Koreans are all respectful of the law. Koreans are good, honest people.
hopes this turns off the italics
guess not
Imagine how much more money the US could free up for its Middle East ventures, including aid for Tel Aviv, if this problem could be eliminated.