[Unverified] Children of US troops born overseas will no longer get automatic US citizenship

[Zippyjuan]

https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-us-troops-kids-born-overseas-dont-get-automatic-citizenship-2019-8

One potential implication could be that the children may not be able to travel to the US when the parents return since they are not considered citizens and would require a special visa. They also could potentially end up stateless- without citizenship of any country.


Children born to US service members and government employees overseas will no longer be automatically considered citizens of the United States, according to policy alert issued by US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) on Wednesday.

Previously, children born to US citizen parents were considered to be "residing in the United States," and therefore would be automatically given citizenship under Immigration and Nationality Act 320.

Now, children born to US service members and government employees, such as those born in US military hospitals or diplomatic facilities, will not be considered as residing in the US, changing the way that they potentially receive citizenship.

The change in policy was first reported by San Francisco Chronicle reporter Tal Kopan.

According to USCIS, previous legislation also explicitly said that spouses of service members who were living outside the US because of their spouses were considered residing in the US, but "that no similar provision was included for children of U.S. armed forces members in the acquisition of citizenship context is significant."

That is one of the reasons why USCIS has now decided that those children are not considered to be residing in the US, and therefore will not be automatically given citizenship. Instead, they will fall under INA 322, which considers them to be residing outside the US and requires them to apply for naturalization.

They will be allowed to complete all naturalization proceedings while living abroad, the new policy says.

https://amp.businessinsider.com/images/5d66df732e22af16253a2e0d-960-623.jpg

"The policy change explains that we will not consider children who live abroad with their parents to be residing in the United States even if their parents are U.S. government employees or U.S. service members stationed outside of the United States, and as a result, these children will no longer be considered to have acquired citizenship automatically," USCIS spokesperson Meredith Parker told Task & Purpose.

"For them to obtain a Certificate of Citizenship, their U.S. citizen parent must apply for citizenship on their behalf."

The process under INA 322 must be completed before the child's 18th birthday.

While children of service members will be allowed to complete the citizenship process outside of the US, Parker added, children of government employees "must enter the U.S. lawfully with an immigrant or nonimmigrant visa and be in lawful status when they take the Oath of Allegiance."

[phill4paul]

I see nothing that says anything about children born unto. I see something that says that if a U.S. military member marries a foreign national that already has children then those children must be naturalized. I see nothing that says that a child born unto an American citizen on a military base is not a natural citizen. Please post the specifics on children born of U.S. citizens abroad on military bases not being naturalized citizens.

[Brian4Liberty]

I see nothing that says anything about children born unto. I see something that says that if a U.S. military member marries a foreign national that already has children then those children must be naturalized. I see nothing that says that a child born unto an American citizen on a military base is not a natural citizen. Please post the specifics on children born of U.S. citizens abroad on military bases not being naturalized citizens.

You aren’t supposed to question, you are supposed to be outraged and get hysterical!

[Zippyjuan]

I see nothing that says anything about children born unto. I see something that says that if a U.S. military member marries a foreign national that already has children then those children must be naturalized. I see nothing that says that a child born unto an American citizen on a military base is not a natural citizen. Please post the specifics on children born of U.S. citizens abroad on military bases not being naturalized citizens.

Try reading it again.


Children born to US service members and government employees overseas will no longer be automatically considered citizens of the United States, according to policy alert issued by US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) on Wednesday.


"The policy change explains that we will not consider children who live abroad with their parents to be residing in the United States even if their parents are U.S. government employees or U.S. service members stationed outside of the United States, and as a result, these children will no longer be considered to have acquired citizenship automatically," USCIS spokesperson Meredith Parker told Task & Purpose.

"For them to obtain a Certificate of Citizenship, their U.S. citizen parent must apply for citizenship on their behalf."

[RJB]

You aren’t supposed to question, you are supposed to be outraged and get hysterical!
That is a word only used by misogynists. Please flog yourself five times and make a public apology before the throne of Hillary.

[phill4paul]

Try reading it again.



"The policy change explains that we will not consider children who live abroad with their parents to be residing in the United States even if their parents are U.S. government employees or U.S. service members stationed outside of the United States, and as a result, these children will no longer be considered to have acquired citizenship automatically," USCIS spokesperson Meredith Parker told Task & Purpose.

"For them to obtain a Certificate of Citizenship, their U.S. citizen parent must apply for citizenship on their behalf."

Fuck you are dense. Please point out in that statement where it says "born unto." Which is the hysteria you are trying to provoke. NOTHING in that says that new born's, of service members, born abroad in a military hospital, excludes them from being naturalized citizens.

Just fuck off already, Zip.

[Zippyjuan]

$#@! you are dense. Please point out in that statement where it says "born unto." Which is the hysteria you are trying to provoke. NOTHING in that says that new born's, of service members, born abroad in a military hospital, excludes them from being naturalized citizens.

Just $#@! off already, Zip.

They used "to" not "unto". I guess that is what confused you.


Children born to US service members and government employees overseas will no longer be automatically considered citizens of the United States, according to policy alert issued by US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) on Wednesday.

[phill4paul]

They used "to" not "unto". I guess that is what confused you.

There is fucking NOTHING in that link that supports what your propagandist article alleges.

Here's you own link. https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/policymanual/updates/20190828-ResidenceForCitizenship.pdf

Peruse that mother fucker and if you can't back up what you said then shut the fuck up.

Requesting thread title change now.

[Brian4Liberty]

Clarifies and corrects past stretching of the law.

Basically, a child of of US military parents must reside in the US to get automatic citizenship. If not, this means paperwork has to be filed before the child turns 18.

This prevents a child from automatically becoming a US citizen if the were born outside the US and never resided in the US. Imagine the alternative. A child born in another country could live their entire lives in another country. When they have children, should that child become a US citizen? How many generations of people who have never been to the US should be considered US citizens?

Another case addressed, which might effect birth tourism:


U.S. Citizens who were Born, But Did Not Reside, in the United States

A U.S. citizen may have automatically acquired U.S. citizenship based on birth in the United States, but never actually resided in the United States. This U.S. citizen will not have established residence in the United States, and may be unable to transmit U.S. citizenship to his or her own children.

For example, if the U.S. citizen, still having never resided in the United States, subsequently marries another U.S. citizen who never resided in the United States, and they give birth to a child outside the United States, the child will not acquire citizenship at birth under INA 301(c) because neither U.S. citizen parent can show the requisite residence in the United States. However, if the U.S. citizen parent had returned to the United States after his or her birth and established residence before giving birth to the child outside the United States, then he or she may be able to meet the residence requirement based on that period of residence and transmit U.S. citizenship to his or her children.

https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/policymanual/updates/20190828-ResidenceForCitizenship.pdf

[Zippyjuan]

There is $#@!ing NOTHING in that link that supports what your propagandist article alleges.

Here's you own link. https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/policymanual/updates/20190828-ResidenceForCitizenship.pdf

Peruse that mother $#@!er and if you can't back up what you said then shut the $#@! up.

Requesting thread title change now.

Did you read the whole thing?


If a U.S. citizen’s birth certificate indicates that his or her mother’s address was outside of the
United States at the time of the birth, USCIS may find that the U.S. citizen does not meet the
residence requirement unless the U.S. citizen can prove U.S. residence.


A child born outside of the United States automatically becomes a U.S. citizen when all of the
following conditions have been met on or after February 27, 2001:2
• The child has at least one parent, including an adoptive parent3 who is a U.S. citizen by
birth or through naturalization;
• The child is under 18 years of age;
• The child is a lawful permanent resident (LPR);4 and
• The child is residing5 in the United States in the legal and physical custody of the U.S.
citizen parent.6


4 A person is generally considered to be an LPR once USCIS approves his or her adjustment application or once he or
she enters the United States with an immigrant visa.

The new change does not consider places like foreign military bases as a US residence or address.

[phill4paul]

Did you read the whole thing?


I did. You didn't. Why the hell would a child born of military spouses on an military base NEED an immigrant VISA? Answer...they fucking wouldn't. Because they are a U.S. citizen at birth. NOT an immigrant. So stop with the hyperbole.

[Zippyjuan]

I did. You didn't. Why the hell would a child born of military spouses on an military base NEED an immigrant VISA? Answer...they $#@!ing wouldn't. Because they are a U.S. citizen at birth. NOT an immigrant. So stop with the hyperbole.

The change was in saying that US bases are no longer considered as part of the US as far as citizenship is concerned. That changes the requirements of what a "lawful permanent resident" is. The "place of residence" is no longer considered to be "In The USA" if it is on a foreign military base.


A person is generally considered to be an LPR once USCIS approves his or her adjustment application or once he or
she enters the United States with an immigrant visa.

https://amp.businessinsider.com/images/5d66df732e22af16253a2e0d-960-623.jpg

[euphemia]

The citizenship of the parents is something to consider. Both my parents were natural born citizens. I was not born in the US.

The same law that covered me also covered John McCain when he ran for president.

Ironically noncitizens who come here for “medical tourism” have babies that are considered US citizens. Kind of a slap in the face if children of citizens living abroad had to jump through a lot of hoops just to bring their children home after deployment is over.

[Swordsmyth]

Clarifies and corrects past stretching of the law.

Basically, a child of of US military parents must reside in the US to get automatic citizenship. If not, this means paperwork has to be filed before the child turns 18.

This prevents a child from automatically becoming a US citizen if the were born outside the US and never resided in the US. Imagine the alternative. A child born in another country could live their entire lives in another country. When they have children, should that child become a US citizen? How many generations of people who have never been to the US should be considered US citizens?

Another case addressed, which might effect birth tourism:


https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/policymanual/updates/20190828-ResidenceForCitizenship.pdf

This not only affects Birth Tourism but also Anchor Babies, that's why the left is up in arms.

Trump is ending irrational birthright citizenship.

[Swordsmyth]

The citizenship of the parents is something to consider. Both my parents were natural born citizens. I was not born in the US.

The same law that covered me also covered John McCain when he ran for president.

Ironically noncitizens who come here for “medical tourism” have babies that are considered US citizens. Kind of a slap in the face if children of citizens living abroad had to jump through a lot of hoops just to bring their children home after deployment is over.
This ends that too.

[Zippyjuan]

This not only affects Birth Tourism but also Anchor Babies, that's why the left is up in arms.

Trump is ending irrational birthright citizenship.

For children of citizens born on military bases overseas. For children born in the USA, he has to change the Constitution.

[Swordsmyth]

For children of citizens born on military bases overseas. For children born in the USA, he has to change the Constitution.
No, he doesn't, temporary visitors aren't covered and invaders aren't covered.

[jkr]

Good
they're not our military anyway...

[euphemia]

A couple of options would be having the mothers come to the US to give birth or having a pre-declaration of citizenship before an overseas birth. There is really no reason why the child of American citizens should have to naturalized because of diplomatic assignment or deployment.

[dannno]

More fake news..


Following publication of this story, US government officials were forced to address widespread concern about how this policy change affects children of US service members. Ken Cuccinelli, Acting Director of USCIS, said in a statement that "this policy update does not affect who is born a U.S. citizen, period."

"This only affects children who were born outside the United States and were not U.S. citizens. This does NOT impact birthright citizenship. This policy update does not deny citizenship to the children of US government employees or members of the military born abroad," he added, though Task & Purpose did not report that citizenship would be denied. "This policy aligns USCIS' process with the Department of State's procedure, that's it."

[dannno]

A couple of options would be having the mothers come to the US to give birth or having a pre-declaration of citizenship before an overseas birth. There is really no reason why the child of American citizens should have to naturalized because of diplomatic assignment or deployment.

This was more Zippy fake news, see my post above.

[Swordsmyth]

More fake news..
It does affect birth tourists and illegals though.

[Philhelm]

It doesn't matter where a child is born to one or more U.S. citizens. That was never a criteria of birthright citizenship.

[phill4paul]

More fake news..

I asked for the tread title to be changed. Perhap's if you did too something could be done about it. Because it is bullshit. FAKE NEWS.

[Swordsmyth]

I asked for the tread title to be changed. Perhap's if you did too something could be done about it. Because it is bull$#@!. FAKE NEWS.

Done.

[TheTexan]

They also could potentially end up stateless- without citizenship of any country.

Stateless? That's a terrifying prospect. I wouldn't wish that fate upon anybody.

[catfeathers]

My youngest was born in a civilian hospital while my husband was in the military and we were stationed overseas. There was paperwork that had to be done to establish citizenship which was processed through the nearest U.S. embassy. He has a Certificate of Birth Abroad instead of a regular birth certificate and a U.S. passport.

[Brian4Liberty]

My youngest was born in a civilian hospital while my husband was in the military and we were stationed overseas. There was paperwork that had to be done to establish citizenship which was processed through the nearest U.S. embassy. He has a Certificate of Birth Abroad instead of a regular birth certificate and a U.S. passport.

Yeah, for the most part, this is all about paperwork.

[Brian4Liberty]

It doesn't matter where a child is born to one or more U.S. citizens. That was never a criteria of birthright citizenship.

Actually, it does address birthright citizenship to a certain extent. It’s not about a child born to American parents. It’s about future generations. For example, a US couple has a child in Brazil. That child resides in Brazil their entire life. Is their child a US citizen? This clarification says that “no”, birthright citizenship does not extend for multiple generations of people who have never officially resided in the US.

[spudea]

Confirmed false. Numerous media retractions today you won't see posted by Zipp. Another great thread by the Zipper

[Ender]

Confirmed false. Numerous media retractions today you won't see posted by Zipp. Another great thread by the Zipper

Not quite- it's still all over the news- these are just a couple of hours ago:

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/us-citizenship-children-of-troops-government-employees-not-automatic-new-policy/

https://www.cnn.com/2019/08/28/politics/us-military-employee-citizenship-rule/index.html

http://balleralert.com/profiles/blogs/children-of-overseas-service-members-will-not-get-automatic-citizenship/

[acptulsa]

Try reading it again.

He's not confused. He knows you posted another misleading headline, which should have contained a word like "some", " certain", or ideally, "non-citizen".


USCIS later clarified the rule explaining it would only affect three categories of people: Children of non-U.S. citizens adopted by U.S. citizen-government employees or service members; children of non-U.S. citizen-government employees or service members who were naturalized after the child’s birth; and children of U.S. citizens who do not meet residency requirements.

But no. Everybody plays the semi-fakenews game these days. Especially Zippy.

[euphemia]

Actually, it does address birthright citizenship to a certain extent. It’s not about a child born to American parents. It’s about future generations. For example, a US couple has a child in Brazil. That child resides in Brazil their entire life. Is their child a US citizen? This clarification says that “no”, birthright citizenship does not extend for multiple generations of people who have never officially resided in the US.

See, that is still a little strange. We have a lot of friends who are missionaries. Some of them were born overseas to US citizens. For most missionaries, that means they visit the US one year and in the other country four years. So really not residing in the US, but still being Americans and holding US passports.