Petitioner Jermaine Amani Thomas was born on August 9, 1986, in a military hospital located on a U.S. military base in Frankfurt, Germany. Thomas's father, a United States citizen, was a member of the United States military serving on the base. Thomas's father first entered the United States in September 1977, enlisted in the United States Army in 1979, and became a United States citizen in May 1984. Thomas's mother was a citizen of Kenya. ...The Bustamante-Barrera v. Gonzales case isn't helpful either way, as it involves derivative citizenship, not citizenship by acquisition.At a hearing before an Immigration Judge ("IJ") on December 12, 2013, Thomas conceded that, if he is not a United States citizen, he is removable based on his aggravated felony and domestic violence convictions. The only relief sought by Thomas before the IJ was a declaration that he is a United States citizen and the termination of removal proceedings. The IJ found that Thomas's birth in Germany gave rise to a rebuttable presumption of alienage. The IJ determined that based on the Department of State Foreign Affairs Manual (FAM), as well as the plain language of 8 U.S.C. S: 1401(a) and the Constitution, the military base on which Thomas was born was not part of the United States for purposes of the Fourteenth Amendment. Accordingly, the IJ concluded that Thomas had failed to rebut the presumption of alienage. ...
The BIA agreed with the IJ that Thomas's birth at the military hospital in Germany, to only one United States citizen parent, gave rise to a rebuttable presumption of alienage. The BIA rejected Thomas's claim that his birth on a military base in Germany rendered him a birthright citizen by virtue of the Fourteenth Amendment. Therefore, the BIA concluded that Thomas was removable and it dismissed the appeal. On April 22, 2014, Thomas filed a timely petition for review in this court. ...
"There are two sources of citizenship, and two only: birth and naturalization." Bustamante-Barrera v. Gonzales, 447 F.3d 388, 394 (5th Cir. 2006) (internal quotation marks omitted). "Within the former category, the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution guarantees that every person 'born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, becomes at once a citizen of the United States, and needs no naturalization.'" Miller v. Albright, 523 U.S. 420, 423-24 (1998) (quoting United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649, 702 (1898)). "Persons not born in the United States acquire citizenship by birth only as provided by Acts of Congress." Id. At the time of Thomas's birth, Congress extended birthright citizenship to children born abroad to one citizen
However, it is undisputed that Thomas was not a statutory birthright citizen because his father did not meet the physical presence requirement of the statute in force at the time of Thomas's birth.1 Id. Consequently, Thomas must rely on the Fourteenth Amendment, which provides, in relevant part, that "[a]ll persons born . . . in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside," U.S. Const. amend. XIV, S: 1, to sustain his claim that he is a birthright citizen. Thomas contends that the military base located in modern-day Germany where he was born was "in the United States" for purposes of the Fourteenth Amendment.
We disagree.
It seems Miller v. Albright, 523 U.S. 420, 423, 118 S.Ct. 1428, 140 L.Ed.2d 575 (1998) is a primary source. Breyer, in dissent, cites Vattel.
“We disagree.”
About what? If naturalization laws grant him citizenship status, he is a citizen. But he is not a natural born citizen if a naturalization act creates his citizenship.
Your link to the 2015 Thomas v. Lynch case doesn’t work. Very interested in this. Can you please provide another link? Thanks!