The person born in America of Mexican parentage would be an American citizen of Mexican descent, not an immigrant. There are many people whose family backgrounds predate the existence of the United States. That would make them indigenous peoples, not immigrants. In fact, compared to them the Anglos are the interlopers, not them.
1. I stand corrected on the terminology. I should have said "son of immigrants".
2. Regarding the indigenous peoples "the Anglos were the immigrants/invaders" canard, I disagree. That only applies to civilized
countries. The United States took over a geographical area that had no civilizations; because none of the scattered people who lived there were civilized. There were no cities. Sure, some of the indians were more gentle, and they had a culture (tribal rituals, songs, language, false religion), but they were still savages, living in darkness and ignorance, living like animals, with no technology or advancement. In fact, every last one of the Indian tribes' cultures were against progress or change of any kind.
The Indian "cultures" weren't really deserving of the name, and these "cultures" deserved to be destroyed and replaced with Catholic ones. Not all cultures are equally valuable or deserving of continued existence. That is blasphemy to the modern liberal multiculturalists, but so be it. No pagan culture has a right to be preserved. The whole world must be converted to the Catholic Faith, and any immoral habits, myths, lies, false religions, demonic rituals, etc. that stand in the way MUST BE DESTROYED and replaced.
Read the accounts of the missionaries who tried to evangelize them, to get the real truth about the Indians. Some were brutal savages, but others converted to the Faith and became as fervent as the first Christians. But still, it was an improvement for Europeans to take over the areas and bring these Indians out of darkness into the civilized world. At least the Spanish and French who were Catholic. What the English did was more of a mixed bag. They did many evil things (smallpox blankets anyone?) but they did result in a huge, unified civilized country that Christians (Europeans) could immigrate to, and build a country with a Christian, hard work ethic (and ripe for evangelization by Catholic missionaries) that became the envy of the whole world.
But also read about how the Indians lived. Their "living structures" were crude and often the air was thick with acrid campfire smoke due to inadequate ventilation. Medicine meant a trip to the local witch doctor, where the devil would be invoked for assistance. Oh, and they didn't eat the "whole buffalo". That is a modern myth created by the liberals and one-worlders. More like they wasted most of it! They weren't as eco-conscious as the liberals claim either. They didn't cause pollution like modern ƈhıną, but only because they didn't have the technology! Not doing something because YOU CAN'T isn't the same as not doing something because YOU CHOOSE NOT TO.
The Puritans or English descendants (WASPs -- White Anglo Saxon Protestants) aren't what made America great -- it was all the Catholic immigrants from Catholic countries (mostly up until 1900) that really gave America its positive traits. The biggest exporters of such Catholics to America were Ireland, Germany, Italy, and Poland. But there were others of course.
For a while, German rivaled English as the most-spoken language in America. And we have all heard of the Irish potato famine. Many Irish immigrated here during that time.