Forty-two years ago, a pregnant Guatemalan woman illegally crossed the Rio Grande River and gave birth to a baby who now has “birthright” citizenship. Today, that child sits in Congress — proudly declaring her allegiance to the country her mother left behind. This is the predictable result of a broken immigration system — one that has allowed the mass importation of both legal and illegal aliens regardless of their capacity or willingness to assimilate into the country.
“I am a proud Guatemalan before I am American,” Illinois Democrat Rep. Delia Ramírez said in Spanish during the opening remarks of the second annual Panamerican Congress in Mexico City. Notably, she sits on the House Homeland Security Committee — a committee dedicated to protecting the homeland.
Following backlash, Ramírez said in a statement that she is the “daughter of immigrants. The press release noted how she is “an American citizen by birthright.”
“I am from both Guatemala and Chicago, Illinois,” she said, after claiming that “[h]onoring my Guatemalan ancestry only strengthens my commitment to America.”
But her comments should alarm anyone because they reveal a deep reality: mass immigration — legal and illegal — has produced not only millions of persons living in America with tenuous ties to the nation, but lawmakers who openly place ancestral identity above national allegiance.
The founders saw this danger coming. They knew our republic could not survive if its people — let alone leaders — were filled with foreign attachments.
Alexander Hamilton warned in 1802 that “[t]he safety of a republic depends essentially on the energy of a common National sentiment; on a uniformity of principles and habits; on the exemption of the citizens from foreign bias, and prejudice; and on that love of country which will almost invariably be found to be closely connected with birth, education and family.”
In other words, divided loyalties endanger the republic itself.
The founders codified this understanding in the naturalization oath, which requires immigrants to “absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to every foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty.” Notably, illegal immigrants and children of both legal and illegal immigrants born in the U.S. don’t have to take a naturalization oath.
It wasn’t ceremonial language — it was a safeguard. A divided heart was a political liability for the safety of a republic. Hamilton understood the republic must be unified in more ways than one.
A divided heart is also a political liability when that divided heart is displayed by a politician. Perhaps that’s why founders like John Jay wrote that there must be strong protections against foreign influence in government. “Permit me to hint, whether it would not be wise and seasonable to provide a strong check to the admission of Foreigners into the administration of our national Government,” Jay wrote in a letter to George Washington in 1787.
Jay clearly feared what we now see: Unassimilated foreigners, or their descendants, carrying the identities and interests of other nations into the halls of Congress.
That concern was echoed during the Constitutional Convention, where members debated on Aug. 13, 1787, about the length of time an immigrant needs to be a citizen in order to become a member of the House of Representatives. Elbridge Gerry “wished that in future the eligibility might be confined to Natives. Foreign powers will intermeddle in our affairs, and spare no expence to influence them. Persons having foreign attachments will be sent among us and insinuated into our councils, in order to be made i[n]struments for their purposes.”
When lawmakers place ancestral pride or ethnic solidarity above their duty to America, it presents a real danger to the republic. A country cannot endure when its leaders are citizens in name only.
The founders understood what many today refuse to acknowledge: Geography and goodwill alone do not ensure loyalty. For a republic to survive, it must rest on a foundation of shared allegiance and a common national identity. When we open our doors indiscriminately — or when they’re broken down without any proper recourse — we risk fracturing the very unity that ensures our safety.
Brianna Lyman is an elections correspondent at The Federalist. Brianna graduated from Fordham University with a degree in International Political Economy. Her work has been featured on Newsmax, Fox News, Fox Business and RealClearPolitics. Follow Brianna on X: @briannalyman2
