[cogitoergosum]

Originally Posted by charlydevo

No it does not.

This is from the Immigration and Nationality Act, Section 337 (Title 8 of the United States Code, Section 1448), which is in front of me as I type:

A person who has applied for naturalization shall, in order to be and before being admitted to citizenship, take in a public ceremony before the Attorney General or a court with jurisdiction under 310(b) an oath-

(1) to support the Constitution of the United States;
(2) to renounce and abjure absolutely and entirely all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty of whom or which the applicant was before a subject or citizen;
.......................

I might have used better wording, but by "recognize" I mean that you cannot obtain or retain the benefits of United States Citizenship until you renounce any and all other citizenship.

FYI, Wikipedia is not always the best source of information, particularly for matters involving law.

That doesnt literally mean they have to give up foreign citizenship, it is just something they must say as part of the oath to make known that they cant be taking orders from foreign leaders. I have family members who hold dual citizenship with the U.S and Mexico, and can vote in both elections. I also know a few people who hold Canadian citizenship.

[charlydevo]

Originally Posted by cogitoergosum

That doesnt literally mean they have to give up foreign citizenship, it is just something they must say as part of the oath to make known that they cant be taking orders from foreign leaders. I have family members who hold dual citizenship with the U.S and Mexico, and can vote in both elections. I also know a few people who hold Canadian citizenship.

Loss of citizenship (INA § 349, 8 USC § 1481)
Section 349 of the INA [8 USC § 1481] specifies several conditions under which US citizenship may be lost. These include:

becoming a naturalized citizen of another country, or declaring allegiance to another country, after reaching age 18; ..................


I will admit that the Immigration and Nationality Act is very confusing. I have seen sections of the INA twice litigated, with two different outcomes or two different interpretations by the courts. Additionally, many sections of the INA are seldom, if ever actually enforced.

Although the U.S. doesn't routinely deport or denaturalize it's citizens for holding dual citizenship, it is indeed illegal to acquire the citizenship of another state after naturalizing as a Untied States citizen. Likewise, you cannot, as I already showed you, become a United States citizen without first renouncing your former citizenship. However, to give some credence to your argument, the United States is weak on enforcing dual citizenship regulations. That doesn't, however, mean that "it is just something they must say as part of the oath to make known that they cant be taking orders from foreign leaders."

We can argue this all day. Having investigated many naturalization fraud cases, I can say that I am pretty well versed in this area. Why do you suppose that the Immigration and Nationality Act is on my desk?

[Zankou]

This is arguably the stupidest legal point I have ever seen debated, and I've practiced law for nine years.

People complain about the way lawyers argue the law. Ever seen a non-lawyer argue the law? This is what you get.

[cogitoergosum]

Originally Posted by charlydevo

I will admit that the Immigration and Nationality Act is very confusing. I have seen sections of the INA twice litigated, with two different outcomes or two different interpretations by the courts. Additionally, many sections of the INA are seldom, if ever actually enforced.

Although the U.S. doesn't routinely deport or denaturalize it's citizens for holding dual citizenship, it is indeed illegal to acquire the citizenship of another state after naturalizing as a Untied States citizen. Likewise, you cannot, as I already showed you, become a United States citizen without first renouncing your former citizenship. However, to give some credence to your argument, the United States is weak on enforcing dual citizenship regulations. That doesn't, however, mean that "it is just something they must say as part of the oath to make known that they cant be taking orders from foreign leaders."

We can argue this all day. Having investigated many naturalization fraud cases, I can say that I am pretty well versed in this area. Why do you suppose that the Immigration and Nationality Act is on my desk?

The state department website says that a person can lose U.S citizenship for applying for foreign citizenship, but only if they have the intent to relinquish their U.S citizenship.

It also says:"Dual nationality can also occur when a person is naturalized in a foreign state without intending to relinquish U.S. nationality and is thereafter found not to have lost U.S. citizenship: the individual consequently may possess dual nationality."

Advice about Possible Loss of U.S. Citizenship and Dual Nationality

[U.S. Soldier]

dude fought, he is natural born

[Kogan]

Originally Posted by bird1965

The US Supreme Court needs to rule on whether John McCain is qualified to run for President. McCain was born in Panama on LEASED land that in now leased by the Chinese. I don't think that qualifies as "Natural born". IF the SC court rules in favor of McCain does that mean all people born on leased land is a "natural born citizen"? That would also include all land leased by all American corporations as they now have the same Rights under the Constitution as the American people. Here is Article 2 of the US Constitution: " No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President" End Quote.

That's such a technicallity. Several of my friends kids have been born in Germany in a German hospital, but they are still considered natural born citizens because of their work.

[Kogan]

Originally Posted by U.S. Soldier

dude fought, he is natural born

As much as I'd like to agree with you on this one, there's a number of US soldiers that aren't even legal citizens. Most of them are great, there's a few rat bags that I was glad to see get sent back to their home countries before they attained citizenship, but that's another story.

[FoxTrot9R]

Originally Posted by charlydevo

We can argue this all day. Having investigated many naturalization fraud cases, I can say that I am pretty well versed in this area. Why do you suppose that the Immigration and Nationality Act is on my desk?

[MicroBrew]

Moot point since the US didn't exist when McCain was born.

[AznTrojan]

this is a non-issue