Removing birthright citizenship would reduce the incentive to bring one's spouse and other family members with them. This would save money on health care and social services. Instead of government funds going to mothers, especially those here illegally, who give birth to obtain citizenship for their children, that money could be saved because fewer immigrants would want to come to the country for that reason. The child who obtains citizenship, in addition; are eligible for social programs, even if they live outside the borders (Smith). It preserves the country's culture by limiting citizenship to those with history in the United States and increasing the number of people who must take a test to be nationalized, history, values ​​and culture would be better preserved (LA Times ). On the other hand, it would harm diversity by ending birthright citizenship and would discourage immigration, which brings diversity to other countries. Have individuals from different backgrounds; encourages unique perspectives and helps develop discussion. The 14th Amendment grants citizenship at birth, meaning an amendment would be required to ratify birthright citizenship legislation. Typically, the process of adding to the Constitution is slow, takes years, and is expensive. The most recent addition to the Constitution is the 27th Amendment on May 7, 1992, which allows congressional pay increases to take effect after the next election. This was originally an issue debated when the Bill of Rights was proposed, according to the history of the United States House of Representatives. This can be confusing. In cases where only one parent is a citizen, the father is unknown, or adopted children are born, the result could lead to confusion, lawsuits, and the opening of Pandora's Space.