8 U.S. Code § 1481.Loss of nationality by native-born or naturalized citizen; voluntary action; burden of proof; presumptions (a)A person who is a national of the United States whether by birth or naturalization, shall lose his nationality by voluntarily performing any of the following acts with the intention of relinquishing United States nationality— naturalization in a foreign state upon his own application or upon an application filed by a duly authorized agent, after having attained the age of eighteen years; or foreign state or a political subdivision thereof, after having attained the age of eighteen years; or foreign state if (A) such armed forces are engaged in hostilities against the United States, or (B) such persons serve as a commissioned or non-commissioned officer; or foreign state or a political subdivision thereof, after attaining the age of eighteen years if he has or acquires the nationality of such foreign state; or (B) accepting, serving in, or performing the duties of any office, post, or employment under the government of a foreign state or a political subdivision thereof, after attaining the age of eighteen years for which office, post, or employment an oath, affirmation, or declaration of allegiance is required; or consular officer of the United States in a foreign state, in such form as may be prescribed by the Secretary of State; or United States a formal written renunciation of nationality in such form as may be prescribed by, and before such officer as may be designated by, the Attorney General, whenever the United States shall be in a state of war and the Attorney Generalshall approve such renunciation as not contrary to the interests of national defense; or United States, violating or conspiring to violate any of the provisions of section 2383 of title 18, or willfully performing any act in violation of section 2385 of title 18, or violating section 2384 of title 18 by engaging in a conspiracy to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, if and when he is convicted thereof by a court martial or by a court of competent jurisdiction. WOuld take the State Department one day with a 3rd year law student to make a case for treason, actions to levy war against the U.S. government by joining ISIS, engaging in conspiracy to put down by force etc... They could convict her in abstentia and issue the order to strip her of her nationaility before you had your morning dump on Friday.
For a natural-born citizen, losing your citizenship is actually quite difficult. The law prohibits the taking of your citizenship against your will, but there are certain actions a citizen can take which are assumed to be a free-will decision that constitutes a voluntary renunciation of the citizenship.
The ways to lose citizenship are detailed in 8 USC 1481: Becoming naturalized in another country Swearing an oath of allegiance to another country Serving in the armed forces of a nation at war with the U.S., or if you are an officer in that force Working for the government of another nation if doing so requires that you become naturalized or that you swear an oath of allegiance Formally renouncing citizenship at a U.S. consular office Formally renouncing citizenship to the U.S. Attorney General By being convicted of committing treason
The court has ruled that a native born person cannot be stripped of their citizenship, they can only relinquish it based on actions that presume a relinquishment. Where the person continues to assert the citizenship, it cannot be removed although they can be punished for actions. We may see some of this play out rather than it be academic. The ISIS traitor falls into a category that presumes relinquishment, but the person can state that that is not their intent, that she still wants to be an American citizen, and that she is not voluntarily relinquishing, and you can lock her up but not take her citizenship. So that issue may actually be upon her/us. Or will I be seeing you argue that she was stripped of her citizenship due to her support of an enemy of the US? That could be good too. Unfortunately, if you/the government goes down that road, you will be seeing the point I made above front and center. The specified actions create a presumption of intent by the person but it is a rebuttable presumption if the person continues to assert their citizenship. It has not been determined yet that she has citizenship to lose. If it is determined she is a citizen, then we will move to the next step and you can let me know when she is stripped of her citizenship. Not gonna happen. She still asserts it.
You just contradicted yourself in the first sentence. Stripped....presume relinquishment...same shit different smell. There is no defense that will stand up in court against booting her out based on joining an enemy of the U.S. government and military and supporting actions against the U.S. government. But there is a GREAT argument against TRUMP claiming she is not a citizen. You don't have a legal background so you might think the difference is irrelevant but it matters. They could have said they were going to strip her of her citizenship based on the laws I cited and she was free to contest in court through her lawyers if she wanted or come back voluntarily and be thrown in jail. Government would have prevailed pretty easily. But taking the stupid route they gave her a cause of action in court and standing....bad move.
She is coming back, count on it. She will do some jail time and be released. Its the same case as Johnny Walker.
No. The criteria create a set of conditions commonly called "rebuttable presumptions" in legal terms. Wherein the government is entitled to presume something in the absence of other information or expressions of intent by the party. If you commit treason in DC and voluntarily assert that you still want to be an American citizen then you cannot have your citizenship removed. If however, you flee the country and they never here anything further about your intent they are entitled to presume that you have voluntarily relinquished it, so for example, your offspring in that country would not be american citizens. Isis woman still asserts her American citizenship. I dont want the bitch here or her kid either so I am willing to watch all of this play out. If her joining an enemy force automatically or allows taking her citizenship, the Pompeo will most definitely go down that road if he loses on the natural born argument in court. I am all for it then. Go that route if you have to and can. Unfortunately, if it ever reaches that point, the intent to relinquish factor will come into play whether I like it or not or whether accept that argument or not. No problem jailing her. Taking her citizenship while she still asserts it is not something I expect to see though. I am all for it so will not be depressed if it happens. But she will be lawyered up plenty and the court will not easily accept the presumption of relinquishment from a party who asserts their citizenship.
From what I understand this woman is the daughter of an ambassador that was not on the blue list when she was born. And that is the issue in which her citizenship is in question. This is not an issue of relinquishment or stripping of citizenship.
I hear that, and probably that is correct, but I am less sure with her than with some others. You hear about all of these American and British women who want to come home but you know what? - most of them are of American or British extract/lineage, whereas our new little Isis queen is of Syrian- I think- heritage. So she is probably muslim, probably speaks the language, and her heritage is within that culture or it gives her a leg up if she wanted to live in the mideast or similar. If she wants to be with her kid, then she is not going to be with her kid in this country if she gets considerable prison time plus she is considered to be traitor, a killer of Americans and general scourge. Now that she is a celebrity, I could very easily see one of terrorist countries offering her a settlement deal and hero status rather than prison and separation from her child. She looks like Gaza Strip material to me. Anyway, yeh, I agree with what you said but also believe she will have "offers." Maybe "anonymous donor" George Soros will finance a little sumpin sumpin for her in the background. We shall see. She would be nuts to come here. If the government loses on the citizenship case with her, they will pile on with every conceivable charge possible to punish her for coming. I guess that could be okay too.
Should be a slam dunk either way presented. Could be : She is not a citizen, but if she is we deem voluntary renunciation by her actions under the law. My problem is Trump's advisors are more clueless on the law then our little group here doing this as a hobby.