View Single Post
  #20  
Old 03-16-2004, 12:24 AM
suijuris's Avatar
suijuris suijuris is offline
Come and Get Some!
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: South Carolina
Posts: 1,511
Re:Citizenship/Jurisdiction Cites

Lets try to use this thread for cites only please...



Here are a few more:







§ 1420 - -Who is born in United States and subject to United States jurisdiction [3A Am Jur 2d ALIENS AND CITIZENS]



A person is born subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, for purposes of acquiring citizenship at birth, if his birth occurs in territory over which the United States is sovereign, even though another country provides all governmental services within the territory and the territory is subsequently ceded to the other country. A child who is conceived in the United States, but born in another country is not a child born in the United States. A child born on a merchant vessel of American registry, on the high seas, of alien parents who are domiciled in the United States is not a child born in the United States.







§ 1455 Definition of "national" [3A Am Jur 2d ALIENS AND CITIZENS]



For purposes of the Immigration and Nationality Act, the term "national" means a person owing permanent allegiance to a state and the term "national of the United States" means either a citizen of the United States or a person who, though not a citizen of the United States, owes permanent allegiance to the United States. An abstract, subjective sense of "allegiance" to the United States is not sufficient to satisfy the statute requiring permanent allegiance to the United States in order to become a national of the United States, and "allegiance" is generally defined as the obligation of fidelity and obedience which the individual owes to the government under which he lives or to his sovereign in return for the protection he receives. Generally, a person may become a national of the United States under the statute granting that status as a result of owing permanent allegiance to the United States only at birth, and a person who is born in another country must affirmatively renounce all allegiance to the foreign state and apply for naturalization in order to become a national of the United States.



¨ Comment: Although other federal statutes and regulations contain similar definitions of "national," nationals may also be defined differently than they are defined for purposes of the Immigration and Nationality Act.







§ 1456 Persons to whom status granted at birth [3A Am Jur 2d ALIENS AND CITIZENS]



Unless otherwise provided by 8 USCS § 1401, the following are nationals, but not citizens, of the United States at birth:

(1) a person born in an outlying possession of the United States on or after the date of formal acquisition of such possession;

(2) a person born outside the United States and its outlying possessions of parents both of whom are nationals, but not citizens, of the United States, and have had a residence in the United States, or one of its outlying possessions, prior to the birth of such person;

(3) a person of unknown parentage found in an outlying possession of the United States while under the age of 5 years, until shown, prior to his attaining the age of 21 years, not to have been born in such outlying possession.



The section of the INA designating as nationals persons born outside the United States and its outlying possessions to parents both of whom are nationals, but not citizens, applies prospectively only and does not apply to persons born prior to its effective date.



Note: At present, the term "outlying possession of the United States" applies only to American Samoa and Swains Island.



Case authorities:



Section 1993 of the Revised Statute of 1874, which as it existed at the time of the defendant's birth on May 30, 1925, awarded U.S. citizenship to foreign-born offspring of U.S. citizen fathers, but not mothers, is unconstitutional as applied to defendant because the Government's stated purpose for the statute's gender distinction–avoiding the problems associated with dual citizenship–does not constitute a facially legitimate and bona fide reason for the distinction. United States v Breyer (1993, ED Pa) 829 F Supp 773, supp op (ED Pa) 1993 US Dist LEXIS 18201.



__________________
When a statute, code, or court holding changes tomorrow, does reality change? Does truth change? Does right and wrong change?
If so, there are no absolutes, and the only logical conclusion is that reality, truth, and right and wrong are determined arbitrarily on a daily basis by those with the most power, guns, and money, and the rest of us can choose to run, fight, or be their slaves.
Reply With Quote