Posted on 01/12/2017 1:29:39 PM PST by SoFloFreeper
The Obama administration is ending the "wet foot, dry foot" policy that granted residency to Cubans who arrived in the United States without visas.
That's according to a senior administration official, who said the policy change was effective immediately.
(Excerpt) Read more at local10.com ...
...no law prevents dual citizenship..
In the oath of citizenship you renounce allegiance to any other country
I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty, of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen;
that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America.
Not a lot of wiggle room in that declaration...
Of course the US can scrap its current policy of recognizing dual nationality. We can simply say that anyone holding a US passport cannot hold a passport from another country. If they do, they lose their American passport.
Here is our current policy on dual nationality:
Section 101(a)(22) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) states that “the term ‘national of the United States’ means (A) a citizen of the United States, or (B) a person who, though not a citizen of the United States, owes permanent allegiance to the United States.” Therefore, U.S. citizens are also U.S. nationals. Non-citizen nationality status refers only individuals who were born either in American Samoa or on Swains Island to parents who are not citizens of the United States. The concept of dual nationality means that a person is a national of two countries at the same time. Each country has its own nationality laws based on its own policy. Persons may have dual nationality by automatic operation of different laws rather than by choice. For example, a child born in a foreign country to U.S. national parents may be both a U.S. national and a national of the country of birth.
A U.S. national may acquire foreign nationality by marriage, or a person naturalized as a U.S. national may not lose the nationality of the country of birth. U.S. law does not mention dual nationality or require a person to choose one nationality or another. Also, a person who is automatically granted another nationality does not risk losing U.S. nationality. However, a person who acquires a foreign nationality by applying for it may lose U.S. nationality. In order to lose U.S. nationality, the law requires that the person must apply for the foreign nationality voluntarily, by free choice, and with the intention to give up U.S. nationality.
Intent can be shown by the person's statements or conduct. The U.S. Government recognizes that dual nationality exists but does not encourage it as a matter of policy because of the problems it may cause. Claims of other countries on dual national U.S. nationals may conflict with U.S. law, and dual nationality may limit U.S. Government efforts to assist nationals abroad. The country where a dual national is located generally has a stronger claim to that person's allegiance.
However, dual nationals owe allegiance to both the United States and the foreign country. They are required to obey the laws of both countries. Either country has the right to enforce its laws, particularly if the person later travels there. Most U.S. nationals, including dual nationals, must use a U.S. passport to enter and leave the United States. Dual nationals may also be required by the foreign country to use its passport to enter and leave that country. Use of the foreign passport does not endanger U.S. nationality. Most countries permit a person to renounce or otherwise lose nationality.
Information on losing foreign nationality can be obtained from the foreign country's embassy and consulates in the United States. Americans can renounce U.S. nationality in the proper form at U.S. embassies and consulates abroad.
Based on the U.S. Department of State regulation on dual citizenship (7 FAM 1162), the Supreme Court of the United States has stated that dual citizenship is a "status long recognized in the law" and that "a person may have and exercise rights of nationality in two countries and be subject to the responsibilities of both. The mere fact he asserts the rights of one citizenship does not, without more, mean that he renounces the other", Kawakita v. U.S., 343 U.S. 717 (1952). In Schneider v. Rusk, 377 U.S. 163 (1964), the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a naturalized U.S. citizen has the right to return to his native country and to resume his former citizenship, and also to remain a U.S. citizen even if he never returns to the United States.
The Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) neither defines dual citizenship nor takes a position for it or against it. There has been no prohibition against dual citizenship, but some provisions of the INA and earlier U.S. nationality laws were designed to reduce situations in which dual citizenship exists. Although naturalizing citizens are required to undertake an oath renouncing previous allegiances, the oath has never been enforced to require the actual termination of original citizenship.
Although the U.S. government does not endorse dual citizenship as a matter of policy, it recognizes the existence of dual citizenship and completely tolerates the maintenance of multiple citizenship by U.S. citizens. In the past, claims of other countries on dual-national U.S. citizens sometimes placed them in situations where their obligations to one country were in conflict with the laws of the other. However, as fewer countries require military service and most base other obligations (such as the payment of taxes) on residence and not citizenship, these conflicts have become less frequent.
A U.S. citizen may lose his or her dual citizenship by obtaining naturalization in a foreign state, by taking an oath or making an affirmation or other formal declaration of allegiance to a foreign state or political subdivision thereof, by serving in the armed forces of a foreign state, or by performing certain other acts, but only if the act was performed "voluntarily and with the intention to relinquish U.S. nationality".
Afroyim v. Rusk, 387 U.S. 253 (1967), is a major United States Supreme Court case in which the Court ruled that citizens of the United States may not be deprived of their citizenship involuntarily. The U.S. government had attempted to revoke the citizenship of Beys Afroyim, a man born in Poland, because he had cast a vote in an Israeli election after becoming a naturalized U.S. citizen. The Supreme Court decided that Afroyim's right to retain his citizenship was guaranteed by the Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution. In so doing, the Court overruled one of its own precedents, Perez v. Brownell (1958), in which it had upheld loss of citizenship under similar circumstances less than a decade earlier.
The Afroyim decision opened the way for a wider acceptance of dual (or multiple) citizenship in United States law. The Bancroft Treaties—a series of agreements between the United States and other nations which had sought to limit dual citizenship following naturalization—were eventually abandoned after the Carter administration concluded that Afroyim and other Supreme Court decisions had rendered them unenforceable.
The impact of Afroyim v. Rusk was narrowed by a later case, Rogers v. Bellei (1971), in which the Court determined that the Fourteenth Amendment safeguarded citizenship only when a person was born or naturalized in the United States, and that Congress retained authority to regulate the citizenship status of a person who was born outside the United States to an American parent. However, the specific law at issue in Rogers v. Bellei—a requirement for a minimum period of U.S. residence that Bellei had failed to satisfy—was repealed by Congress in 1978. As a consequence of revised policies adopted in 1990 by the United States Department of State, it is now (in the words of one expert) "virtually impossible to lose American citizenship without formally and expressly renouncing it.
The US may not endorse dual nationality/citizenship, but it recognizes it. A distinction without a difference.
“Also, a person who is automatically granted another nationality does not risk losing U.S. nationality.”
That’s the law.
As for me, I have the nationality of the country where I was born and US citizenship as both my parents were US citizens. I did not chose the country where I was born and at the moment of my birth had two nationalities.
However, having dual nationality does nothing for me. I always travel on my US Passport and have only fulfilled and exercised my rights and obligations of being a US citizen.
For some time from when I was 18-34 or so, I could not travel to the country of my birth as they recognize me as a citizen and I owed them military service.
I’m an American and you are not going to revoke my U.S. citizenship.
I can't do anything about your citizenship. As a matter of policy, I would like the US to establish the principle that anyone holding dual passports should be forced to choose one country or the other. In Germany, there is a policy that any naturalized Turks who are discovered also holding a Turkish passport will lose their German citizenship. This sounds like a reasonable policy to me.
Give me an example of someone who came here as an immigrant from another country (someone with no ties to this country) and was naturalized as an American citizen but the American government allowed them to retained their previous citizenship ...the so called “dual citizenship”
name someone and the circumstance...
PING to #91
For some time from when I was 18-34 or so, I could not travel to the country of my birth
_______________________________________
Hmmmmmmmmm
I can but I need my American passport to get in...
I am no longer a New Zealand citizen...
They too recognized the cutting of all ties...
They don’t regard me as one of theirs any more...
I have to got through customs as a foreigner...
same with England now even though I was born back when we were still British subjects...(I could have had a British passport)
(the 1st time I went to England I was still a New Zealand citizen with a New Zealand passport and just “walked into” that country...)
That really does nothing.
Not all dual citizens have two passports and those who do only use their American passport.
The country where I was born views me as a citizen and there is nothing I can do about that.
Having dual nationality does nothing for me, except that on the very slight chance that an extremely major calamity occurs in the United States, to the extent that society collapses, I have a place to go.
Read post #86.
Many dual citizens have two passports. They use their US passport to travel from and to the US, but use their other passport for travel elsewhere. Having a passport from a EU country allows you to travel freely within the EU and you can work and stay for as long as you want.
You can denounce your citizenship in the other country similar to what Ted Cruz did with his birthright citizenship in Canada.
“You can denounce your citizenship in the other country similar to what Ted Cruz did with his birthright citizenship in Canada.”
I have no reason to renounce a citizenship and even if I were to renounce a citizenship, I can attain that citizenship once again by simply proclaiming that I am a citizen.
It’s that easy.
Effectively, I could walk into the embassy on Monday and renounce my citizenship and then go back to the embassy on Tuesday and proclaim my citizenship and do that every day for the rest of my life.
My daughters are US and Brazil citizens
I had a Brazil passport long expired
They were supposed to turn theirs in at age 18
They didn’t
And as I implied in a previous post, they never can fully extract themselves from being Brazilian citizens, as at any moment all they need to do is proclaim that they are Brazilian citizens and they are Brazilian citizens,
Gee whatever will they think of next...
now we have transcitizen...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.