It might surprise many of you to learn that I was born in Japan. Specifically I was born at Zama Army Hospital in Sagami Ono.

For background, my dad was serving in the U.S. Navy stationed at Atsugi and my mother decided to live over there with him leading up to my birth.

There was never a question about my citizenship. I was an American citizen at birth because my parents were American citizens.

I have two birth certificates – one issued by the hospital and one issued by the U.S. State Department. But I took an eternal ribbing from classmates growing up that I didn’t look Japanese and that I was a Japanese citizen and could never be president. It seems ignorance runs rampant in junior high school.

I never would have been a citizen of Japan merely because I was expelled from my mother’s womb in a hospital in Japan. That country doesn’t bestow citizenship based on soil. Neither should the United States.

As you know, last week the Supreme Court began to hear oral arguments as President Trump seeks to end this birthright citizenship debate for foreign nationals who come here, give birth and have their children instantly become U.S. citizens. Anchor babies, if you will.

The practice of birthright citizenship stems from an interpretation of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution which came about because of the Civil War and its aftermath. Its goal was to guarantee citizenship to former slaves, not to establish a universal rule for all future cases of birth on U.S. soil.

You must review history to understand what was taking place back in 1868 when the 14th Amendment. Between the time Congress banned the international slave trade in 1808 and the abolition of slavery in 1865, many thousands of slaves were illegally brought into the U.S. These illegally imported slaves had a substantial number of U.S.-born children and grandchildren. The slaves were never going back to their homeland from where they were captured since generations were acclimated to America, albeit under tragic conditions. Thus, when slavery was abolished and slaves and their families slowly became integrated into American culture as free people, they rightly were bestowed American citizenship.

It’s the first line that has been debated. It reads: “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.”

Some lawmakers at the time explicitly discussed excluding children of foreign diplomats and members of sovereign Native American tribes. The framers did not intend an absolute soil-based rule.

Liberals suggest the phrase “subject to the jurisdiction” also applies to those who snuck across the border and gave birth on U.S. soil. That certainly should not be allowed and it should not also apply to pregnant Chinese women who fly to the U.S. “on vacation” for the express purpose to give birth and take the child back home as an American citizen.

The court will need to decide on how the Fourteenth Amendment should be interpreted relating to the phrase “...and subject to the jurisdiction thereof.” Opponents of broad birthright citizenship argue that this clause is not redundant — it must limit who qualifies. They claim “jurisdiction” means full political allegiance, not just being physically present. Thus, a child born to foreign nationals (especially those who retain allegiance to another country) is not fully subject to U.S. jurisdiction in the constitutional sense. This interpretation – and the one I believe is the case – suggests that soil is insufficient without complete legal and political submission to U.S. authority. Citizenship should reflect consent and allegiance, not just geography. A child of foreign nationals may inherit the parents’ political ties, making automatic citizenship constitutionally questionable.

The Supreme Court case United States v. Wong Kim Ark is often cited as establishing birthright citizenship. However, the ruling applied specifically to lawfully present permanent residents, not all foreign nationals. Therefore, it does not definitively settle the status of children born to those without legal status.

Citizenship should be based on allegiance to America, not because you solely want to fly another country’s flag here, speak the non-native language and put down the country while reaping the benefits of living in an economically superior country. Thus, dual citizenship, in my opinion, should not be allowed either.

Democrats don’t want birthright citizenship to end for political, not noble, reasons. They depend on perpetuating illegal immigration as a permanent underclass that tend to vote for Democrats in elections.

* * * * *

As editor I carry with me a deep institutional knowledge of Ceres for the past three decades going on four.

Let me go back a few years when Walmart was begging the city to pull up stakes at the Hatch and Mitchell building and build the massive Supercenter near the freeway.

Chris Vierra was mayor at the time and the council was concerned about how long it would take to fill the vacant store and who might occupy it. Lots of community members had pipe dreams of an indoor sports arena, a movie theater or some kind of indoor recreation. Others were hoping for a Target, thinking Walmart would ever turn over their own building to their biggest competitor.

Walmart was pumping a lot of BS into the ears of the council. I remember how they were filling their ears with dreams of a Kohl’s, Petco, Orchard Supply Hardware, Pier 1 Imports, PetSmart, Sears, Lowe’s, Dick’s Sporting Goods, Bed Bath & Beyond, Hobby Lobby, Marshalls, Macy’s, Office Depot, Fry’s, Jo-Ann, BevMo!, Dillards, T.J. Maxx and Cost Plus World Market. Of course, none of those materialized. In fact, Sears, Bed, Bath & Beyond, JoAnn’s Fabrics and OSH are all gone out of business since then.

The Walmart space will soon be taken up by a second Ross Dress for Less for Ceres, a Vallarta Supermarket catering to Hispanic customers and a Five Below. While it’s better to have the buildings filled with viable businesses rather than remain a vacant shell, some are not excited. Ross and Five Below are discount retailers. Lots of folks were excited when Rancho San Miguel opened to much fanfare on Hatch Road in 2012 but it closed in 2019 – the first time in the company’s then 24-year history that a decision to close a store has been made. Hopefully the same fate won’t befall Vallarta.

I think the vast majority in Ceres would like to Ceres land something no other city has, such as a Cracker Barrel.

Of course, we’re still waiting to see how the legal challenge to Maverik turns out. It’s too bad that businessman Sunny Ghai would stoop so low as to sue to keep a competitor like Maverik out of town. He doesn’t want Maverik to have the same right to develop as he did which is quite frankly unfair and un-American.

* * * * *

It’s so unfortunate that lifelong Californians are being forced to leave the state they love. But if you can’t afford a state because of its radical policies, you go where it’s cheaper.

According to the University of California, California Policy Lab, Californians who leave the state pay less for housing and are more likely to own a home. On average, out-of-state movers are relocating to neighborhoods where housing costs — including rent or mortgage, utilities, property taxes, and insurance — are about $672 lower per month. Rents in their new neighborhoods are about $638 (or roughly 30%) lower, while the median home price is nearly $398,000 (or 48%) lower than in the communities they leave behind.

The study also notes that seven years after leaving California, former residents are about 48 percent more likely (11 percentage point difference) to own a home than similar Californians who stayed in the state.

People who leave California are increasingly from higher-income neighborhoods but these movers are on average, financially worse off than their neighbors. The share of movers leaving higher-income neighborhoods has increased by about 6.4 percentage points (from 34% to 40%) since the pandemic. Compared with their neighbors in these higher-income neighborhoods, movers, on average, show signs of worse financial health, including lower credit scores, higher student debt, and lower homeownership rates.

Where are they moving to? Nevada stands out as the largest net recipient of Californians on a per-capita basis, followed by Idaho, Oregon, and Arizona.

California’s population decline is not just due to folks moving out but fewer are moving in. Between 2020 and 2025, 42 states sent fewer people to California than they did before the pandemic. And if this trend continues, California is on track to lose three to four congressional seats in the next decade. The state’s tax base will shrink.

You can lay all the blame at the feet of Governor Newsom and Sacramento Democrats passed the policies driving these costs, higher taxes, higher energy prices, and more barriers to building housing. Democrats because they hold a two-third super majority, basically neutering the Republicans in both the state Assembly and Senate.

Which is why we need a Republican governor to veto the ridiculous bills being churned out.

* * * * *

Mayor Javier Lopez thinks Ceres is moving in the right direction. Central to his post on Friday in which he drew attention to his own puff piece is a drone shot of the rusty Ceres water tower. Not good optics.

His piece was ridiculed.

Here is a sample of what folks said:

Daisy-Steve Castillo: “Which way is that bc I see no changes.”

Vicky Cooper: “Infrastructure, the work that has been done on roads is unfinished, they left a mess, the roads were not paved back to condition before construction and there are tremendous number of potholes around town and crumbling asphalt that needs repairs.”

Aspen Gregg: “lol I’m really starting to think the mayor is on something because WTH is this!???? You say you budget this and improve this in whattt? And you’re making it safer for our future and protecting the future in Ceres? How can you say that when you have shown you want to take everything from our youth “the future” you haven’t done nothing to help our future in Ceres it has only been about you but your future in Ceres is a joke! If you cared about the safety in Ceres you would be happy to keep sports around or make things happen for our youth you care about and a you’re a joke to Ceres we have more cones on the road because you can’t keep your word on anything! Do better, get more involved instead of having your head down every council meeting. You should show up to things, make it known you care not just for the money or pics. You made Ceres a laughing stock! Everything you say is a lie and what works for you. If you were smart you would fix it before it keeps getting worse but we all know how your brain works.

“You’ll talk about budgets and how you’re helping in that but robbed CYB and laughed ok! Again you’re a lot of talk no-action kinda guy.

“Mayor Javier Lopez anything you gotta say? You realize you are the problem you are a pick me guy. I actually think it’s funny you have a pic of youth baseball boys at CYB as your cover photo but have done nothing to save the “future” boy.”

April Hopper Woods: “I wonder if the mayor actually lives here in Ceres. I want to know who he’s hiring for the fabulous infrastructure job that just happened on Hatch?”

Evelyn Parra Vazquez: “I don’t know if I would exactly call this the right direction. How can one say they are building a family oriented community considering what has been going on with our youth organizations like summer swim program, soccer and the biggest disappointments of all baseball. And our now non-existent basketball league. IDK if you have children but for me as a parent and someone who grew up playing sports in Ceres our youth development has taken a huge hit. No one wants to play here because of the shenanigans behind the scenes.

“While I will note that the homeless mess as improved that’s pretty much it.

If we don’t do right by our youth they will not return from college and want to build a family life here. They will take their well-earned money to another city and build lives there where they can raise children in communities that care about youth sports and development. That is what families are looking for. Nice clean parks and nice youth programs.

“The housing project. I hope the developers were properly vetted. Ceres has two failed housing projects. The ones on Hatch Road by Central that haven’t been completed 100% and the ones over by Hatch and Morgan Road.

“The city has growing pains that it has not been able to overcome.

“A large city manager overturn is a clear indicator that the city is at a standstill.

“We need people with development experience. People who want to build something great. People who have invested interest in Ceres. Hiring idle minds isn’t going to move Ceres forward.”

Josh Steeley: “These posts are the opposite of reality and rage bait.”

Brittany White: “Been in Ceres my whole life, moved to another city a year ago and every time I go back I just think how bad Ceres is becoming. Keep it small town. Just turning it into a mini Modesto.”

Sonny Hernandez: “If you think the city of Ceres is going into the right direction. You have no clue.”

Linda Ryno: “I’m thinking a new slogan is ’Clueless in Ceres.’”

This column is the opinion of Jeff Benziger, and does not necessarily represent the opinion of The Ceres Courier or 209 Multimedia Corporation. How do you feel about this? Let Jeff know at jeffb@cerescourier.com