change what law???

Excellent answer Latrivia! You're absolutely right on this. At the time of the founding of this nation, there were no naturalized citizens. The Founding Fathers welcomed hard-working citizens from across the pond to help develop this 'new world'. I often tout the wisdom of the Founding Fathers, and particularly their foresight. However, this is one area where they simply couldn't have imagined that we'd someday be in the position we are today. Citizens from other nations cross our borders illegally, with all manner of intention to take advantage of the benefits this nation offers. One example that still eats at me was the South American native, who snuck into the USA for oncology treatment. He was diagnosed in his own country, where treatment would have been very expensive. So, he travelled to the USA (illegally), went to the emergency room in Georgia, where they re-diagnosed his cancer. And, began receiving treatment under the Medicaid safety belt. Once he was stabilized, and it was determined that he was here illegally, the hospital chartered a flight for him (at their cost) to return him to his own country. He sued the hospital (in US courts), and won. The citizens of this nation had to foot the bill for full scale oncology treatment, follow-up, food, housing, etc... for more than two years! Last I heard, he was still here. In what world does that make sense? You're also right about 'anchor-babies' being a big problem. Not in the case where the mother marries a US citizen, before delivering their child(ren). But, more specifically when they cross the Rio Grande at 8 months to term, to deliver the child on US soil. Often times without the father present. So, as soon as the woman goes into labor, she becomes the financial burden of our society. It would be easier to overlook if this was the exception, rather than the rule. Alas, it is not.

If the freedom of speech is restricted to some people, then it's not really the freedom of speech, now is it?