Replies

[[Statutes “conferring citizenship upon foreign-born children of citizens” is naturalization.]]

You keep citing wong kim- however recent court cases have declared congress does have a right to declare who needs naturalization and who doesn’t- You are citing majority opinion, not law- and since that case, and the Bellei case- courts have declared there is no difference between a child born to a us citizen overseas and one born here- that’s just the law now-

[[Statutes “conferring citizenship upon foreign-born children of citizens” is naturalization.]]

Nothing is conferred upon a child born off soil to a US citizen- it is their birthright- which is why we have the recent court cases finding no difference in the above situation i’ve outlined a few times now-

[[Congress has no authority, expressed or implied, to take citizenship from people.]]

First- it was the courts that did it not congress- second, courts do have a right to strip a citizen of hteir citizenship in the case of treason- and

[[The Constitution prevents the U.S. government from involuntarily stripping individuals of their citizenship. However, a person will no longer be a U.S. citizen if, by a preponderance of the evidence, officials can prove that the individual intended to renounce his U.S. citizenship.]]

http://blogs.findlaw.com/law_and_life/2012/06/can-you-lose-us-citizenship-renounce-it.html

(However- since the Bellie case and others like it many years go- it has become much much harder for a court to conclude that a person ‘intends to expatriate’ without actually going through hte process of expatriation’ As I’ll discuss more below-)

I know you have been over and over and over with this issue, and regarding the Bellei case with a poster/lawyer here called springfieldreformer- I’ve read those threads before- and He’s showed that the Bellei case does not reflect what it is claimed it does-

Bellie is not controlling law- In the more recent Nguyen (2001) case The supreme court recognizes only two categories, born with citizenship (natural born) versus acquiring citizenship at some time *after* birth (naturalization).

Nothing in the Bellie case found that the fella was naturalized- only that he had additional burdens being born off soil that had to be met in order to RETAIN (cps for emphasis because this is a key point) his citizenship- Bellei did not meet these requirements, and subsequently, the court- erroneously- (although, at that time, it was allowed by law to do so because the law regarding citizenship and expatriation was so vague) stripped him of his citizenship (which you will see explained in the dissenting opinion) because the court at that time had massive leeway to declare who ‘intended to expatriate’- Recent courts have made it much much harder for courts to strip a citizen of hteir citizenship based solely o na court’s interpretation of a citizen’s ‘intent to expatriate’- Courts have, since those cases you mentioned, made it nearly impossible for a court to strip a citizen of their citizenship UNLESS the person commits treason OR formally renounces their citizenship in a formal ceremony of expatriation and swears allegiance to another country- In the Bellei case- Bellie RELINQUISHED (again Cps because this is key to this case and to subsequent cases which forced the courts to make it harder for the law to strip a citizen of their citizenship based solely on the courts interpretation of a person’s actions or inaction, as in the case of Bellie) his citizenship

The CRS report outlines cases which have since refined who can be stripped of their citizenship and who can’t

(I’ll not go through the relevant points listed in the report as I have done so many times before- you can find the recent Sc cases and federal cases regarding the issues I’ve mentioned about 3/4 or so down the page- our discussion here is not going to change the fact that courts recognize there is no difference between a child born to a US citizen overseas as a child born to a us citizen here- Simply because a statute refines what must be done to retain ones citizenship does not make it a process of naturalization which all foreign born children born to non us citizens must go through with very few exceptions) The statute doesn’t make an NBC an NBC- it confirms it by way of ‘at birth/by birth’ natural descent/birthright- if certain requirements are not met, then it is assumed the person has relinquished citizenship, not that they never had it in the first place-)

http://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R42097.pdf