Judge: Gay couple’s child born in England is a US citizen

mypanhandle.com ^ | 08/31/2020 | KATE BRUMBACK

[Robert DeLong]

If you say so.

[maddog55]

Last word kind of guy as well... But I’m game.

[Robert DeLong]

No doubt you are game, lame game.

[redcatcherb412]

Every child born from foreign women that were impregnated by American serviceman during conflicts overseas are officially citizens.

Not always.
A Mother (estonian living in Germany) meets and lives with US Serviceman while he was based in Germany post WW2 and has a baby by him. He gets sent home, says sayonara to the baby mama, and the Mother gives the child to an orphanage. The child is then adopted by an American couple. The child had to wait 5 years and go thru the naturalization process for citizenship. Nothing automatic there.

[Svartalfiar]

I don't understand the origins of the State Dept's policy for this case.

Because the State Department initially ruled her as "not a citizen". She's biologically the kid of a US citizen, so I don't see how they justified that correctly.

U.S. District Judge Michael Brown wrote in an order issued Thursday that the girl is not required to be biologically related to both of her U.S. citizen parents to be eligible for citizenship.

This is obviously incorrect. First, in this case, the girl IS biologically related to one of the parents. Second, if she wasn't, then she shouldn't be a citizen, so this statement is wrong both on an underlying fact, and the judge's conclusion. If the judge is correct, then anybody overseas can find two random Americans and have them claim any kids to make them US citizens.


And because Gregg, the biological parent, hadn’t lived in the U.S. for five years prior to Simone’s birth, the State Department determined Simone was not a U.S. citizen.
...
while Gregg was born in London to a U.S. citizen mother and British father and was raised in London with dual citizenship.

I don't get this part. Gregg had citizenship from birth, so what's with the five year requirement? He's a citizen, so his biological kids should be citizens too. But even without all this, there's no question the kid is eligible for citizenship. The only possible question is whether it would be automatic or require naturalization. And since Dad's a citizen, it should be automatic.

[lodi90]

I don’t get this part. Gregg had citizenship from birth, so what’s with the five year requirement?

---

There are still some old school immigration rules on the books. I believe the kid has to spend time in the US before age 25 (?) or the child risks losing citizenship.

[Redwood71]

“Nothing automatic there.”

But that’s what makes this ruling so atypical. The only tracking device that can be used to define parentage is DNA profiles. If the child is a citizen based upon DNA as the mother was not a citizen, then anyone with any American citizen’s DNA is officially a citizen at birth as per the judges decision if there is any comparable DNA in the child. And in this case, the mother’s DNA means nothing unless her’s holds strands of a provable American citizen. And if she lived in the US or its territories for more than 4 years after age 14, the child would be considered a citizen under another part of the 14th Amendment even if the father was not.

Designation of citizenship no longer is cut and dry. This opens up a number of cans of worms. Slippery slope.

rwood

[Svartalfiar]

There are still some old school immigration rules on the books. I believe the kid has to spend time in the US before age 25 (?) or the child risks losing citizenship.

Yea, if you read woodpusher's post #66, he's got the code posted. The actual text requires physical presence for a total of five years after age 14, not just the preceding five years, for a single parent if the other is an alien. So if Gregg never lived in these US earlier, and has only been here a year or two, he doesn't give the kid automatic citizenship.

They can still naturalize the kid, and it should be pretty easy, but it looks like the judge is likely wrong, legally.

[Svartalfiar]

"I don’t see how she isn’t born out of wedlock when the biological parents aren’t married to each other. I guess that’s too logical."

They are married. Not that it matters.

No, they aren't. One parent is entirely alien. UK citizen, not a US LPR or even visitor. The other parent is "married", but not to Mom. Code looks at the parents, not a parent/adopter. And yes, it does matter because only certain groups automatically pass citizenship on to their kids. Look at woodpusher's post #66. He posted the applicable US Code.


Actually the law doesn't say the parent has to live in the US for five years. That's just a statement being made about this particular parent.

Again, look at woodpusher's post. If one parent is an alien, the other has to be a citizen, and have been physically present in these US for a minimum five years, two of which must be after age 14. If Gregg never lived here (born/lived in UK) earlier, and moved to Georgia less than five years ago, he doesn't qualify to give his kid automatic citizenship. The kid's eligible for an easy naturalization, but that's it.

[Svartalfiar]

There are Freepers who proclaim that even foreign born citizens can retain their previous citizenships and become naturalized US “dual citizens”.

This country is the global land without borders and anyone can claim to be of here, voting here and abroad and traveling on multiple passports.

They can. These US doesn't really enforce you actually revoking your old citizenships, and how can they? Sure, these US can revoke your citizenship if they determine that a naturalized citizen is still "keeping" their old citizenship, but that is very difficult to enforce. Not worth the time or effort unless it's an additional criminal case.

What if the other country doesn't recognize the revocation? Does that mean it's impossible for any of their citizens to ever gain US citizenship? Since obviously that means their people will always retain their foreign citizenship, so they could only become dual citizens.

What if tomorrow, Spain passed a law stating that all US citizens are now also citizens of Spain? Does that mean every US citizen loses their US citizenship, because these US doesn't allow for dual citizenship?

[maddog55]

Word..

[mlo]

"Our next president."

They wouldn't be 35 by the next term, and wouldn't be President at any time except in the event we elected them, same as anyone else. Being eligible isn't a free pass. I'm eligible. I'm still not the President.

[mlo]

"The other parent is "married", but not to Mom. Code looks at the parents, not a parent/adopter"

That's what I said. "Not that it matters". They are married depending on who you mean by "they".

"And yes, it does matter because only certain groups automatically pass citizenship on to their kids..."

It matters who the legal parents are. It doesn't matter who is married.

"Again, look at woodpusher's post. If one parent is an alien, the other has to be a citizen, and have been physically present in these US for a minimum five years..."

Yes, that's true. When I looked it up the first time I actually found a page showing US Code that said something different. But I acknowledge this version is the correct one.

So the one biological parent is a citizen, and can pass that citizenship on as long as they meet the residency requirement. The State Dept is saying they don't. But there's nothing in the code about "wedlock", so I don't know where they get that bit.

Clearly this case is about whether the second parent is the biological mother or the partner of the biological father. Who the law sees as a parent is often not a biological question though, and adoptive parents are legal parents. I don't see this case as very remarkable.

[wardaddy]

If you read the article you can see their logic which is based on other precedence like the five year immediate residency requirement and whatnot

This is not like a sanctioned marriage ....homo or not....was on vacation in London and a birth happened

It’s more complicated

The state department is hardly a bastion of conservative reflection

[Mr. Blond]

Way to miss the joke.