Visa applications are a far broader class than people going through the naturalization process, and, while there may be an argument that the naturalization process is excessively invasive, an application for citizenship does justify more depth of scrutiny than a visa application.
Then why is there zero scrutiny on babies born into citizenship? Countries always manage to excuse their own people even when they're a disproportionately high cause of crime.
> Countries always manage to excuse their own people
Countries are abstraction. “Their own people” are the concrete components making up the country, and, in even in the theoretical ideal, the people all of their policies serve.
Before a baby is born, it's not yet a person making up the country, just as an citizenship applicant isn't yet either. The latter is easier to evaluate for "goodness", but I don't think that's the reason people tolerate all babies to readily. It's probably because the baby's parents are citizens and feel like having a citizen baby is their right. What if an immigrant's citizen spouse felt like having their partner be a citizen was a right too? I guess those people are too much of a minority to affect immigration laws. So yea, it's to serve the existing citizens but still arbitrary.
Really? I think the opposite. The first gate should be the hardest to he through, especially if you get a visa that is a guaranteed path to citizenship like an H1B (H1B to Green Card to Citizen).
There are no visas that are a guaranteed path to citizenship (hence, the naturalization process, which can and will knock people out even if they have an immigrant visa), least of all non-immigrant visas (including dual-intent visas like the H-1B.)
