• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Birthright Citizenship

How far down the slope have Britain, France, Norway (basically all Western Europe) gone?

And why did those countries change their laws in the first place? beacuse of all the "guest workers" and muslims that were immigrating tinto those countries. Have the chane in the laws helped the social and legal situations with those immigrants? No. How many more riots witll there be in the slums of France this summer?

Why should we immitate the Europeans?

(besides, aren't those all "Socialist" countries with free health care?)
 
Last edited:
And why did those countries change their laws in the first place?

You assume all European countries have changed their laws regarding this. Wikipedia only mentions that Germany and the UK has changed their laws.

I know it isn't true for Norway. Just being born here has never been enough to grant you citizenship. On the other hand, getting citizenship isn't very hard - all you have to do is live here for five years (legally) and then apply.

ETA: (And people should be happy for that in some regards. With Norwegian citizenship comes not just rights and privileges, but duties as well. Imagine your mother giving birth to you in Norway, and then 18 years later you get conscripted into the Norwegian military!)
 
Last edited:
You assume all European countries have changed their laws regarding this. Wikipedia only mentions that Germany and the UK has changed their laws.

IIRC, Germany went the other way. They have long held to the concept of jus sanguinis and now allow a modified jus soli
 
ETA: (And people should be happy for that in some regards. With Norwegian citizenship comes not just rights and privileges, but duties as well. Imagine your mother giving birth to you in Norway, and then 18 years later you get conscripted into the Norwegian military!)

The court case Perkins v. Elg reviewed a situation like that from the turn of the century.

although I do not believe that the U.S. allows you to serve as a commissioned officer in a foriegn army
 
Who flies to a foreign country when they have a baby due in the first place?

Some do:

It doesn't exactly happen "automatically" even in the US. You have to go through a legal process involving a few steps (getting the birth certificate, applying for a passport, etc.). I know this from personal experience, as I once assisted a couple that came to the US to have their child. I felt honored (and a little puzzled) that they would go to such lengths to ensure US citizenship for her.

Even from a purely pragmatic point of view, I would say that any family that is resourceful enough to go to such lengths is a family you want as your citizens.
 
The court case Perkins v. Elg reviewed a situation like that from the turn of the century.

I read up on it on Wikipedia, but didn't see anything relevant to having to serve in the military if you're a Norwegian citizen with dual citizenship.

During my conscription, I served together with a dual Spanish-Norwegian citizen who had only spent the odd vacation in Norway since his birth. Poor guy, he came straight from doing his conscription period in Spain.. :)

although I do not believe that the U.S. allows you to serve as a commissioned officer in a foriegn army

Well, there's really no danger of becoming an officer during your conscription period..
 
I read up on it on Wikipedia, but didn't see anything relevant to having to serve in the military if you're a Norwegian citizen with dual citizenship.

the opinion contains the folowing:

This principle was clearly stated by Attorney General Edwards Pierrepont in his letter of advice to the Secretary of State Hamilton Fish, in Steinkauler's Case, 15 Op.Atty.Gen. 15. The facts were these: one Steinkauler, a Prussian subject by birth, emigrated to the United States in 1848, was naturalized in 1854, and in the following year had a son who was born in St. Louis. Four years later, Steinkauler returned to Germany, taking this child, and became domiciled at Weisbaden, where they continuously resided. When the son reached the age of twenty years, the German Government called upon him to report for military duty, and his father then invoked the intervention of the American Legation on the ground that his son was a native citizen of the United States. To an inquiry by our Minister, the father declined to give an assurance that the son would return to this country within a reasonable time. On reviewing the pertinent points in the case, including the Naturalization Treaty of 1868 with North Germany, 15 Stat. 615, the Attorney General reached the following conclusion:

"Young Steinkauler is a native-born American citizen. There is no law of the United States under which his father or any other person can deprive him of his birthright. He can return to America at the age of twenty-one, and in due time, if the people elect, he can become President of the United States;

note that the age of majority at that time in the U.S. was 21.
 
the opinion contains the folowing:

note that the age of majority at that time in the U.S. was 21.

I still don't see it. All I see is that you can't lose your American citizenship over it, not that you have the right to refuse to be conscripted by a nation of which you are a citizen.

Also, I can't see how the Norwegian government would give a rat's ass what an American court says when it comes to the duties of a Norwegian citizen as per the Norwegian constitution.

ETA:
Article 109 of the Norwegian constitution

As a general rule every citizen of the State is equally bound to serve in the defence of the Country for a specific period, irrespective of birth or fortune.

The application of this principle, and the restrictions to which it shall be subject, shall be determined by law.
 
Last edited:
Because America needs more unskilled workers :rolleyes:

Demand for cheap unskilled labor (particularly manual labor) is relatively high in the United States. For firms to keep their prices low to remain competitive (and so that you and I can eat tomatoes without paying a dollar each for them), they seek out cheap sources of labor. In fact, to counter the "there's not enough jobs, therefore immigrants are taking jobs that I could be doing" argument, there has been a group set up by immigrant workers where they will literally give their job to unemployed Americans who ask to have it: http://takeourjobs.org/
 
so if I have a religious experience in Kenya, and become "born again", I become a Kenyan citizen?

:)
 
Thunder, what did your coworkers say? I'm curious.

wow, I totally forgot. I'll ask my Indian co-worker as soon as she comes back to her desk.

and then the Russian guy. though he came as a refugee under the Jackson Bill, which game special status to Jews from the USSR.
 
My Indian co-worker got her visa in 3 months. :)

Though, her husband was an engineer and that gave them preferential status.

One Russian worker waited 1 year, the other waited 3 months. But he came from Italy and did not get any special treatment as a Soviet Jew.

Guy from Ukraine also took about a year.

Guy from Egypt, 3 months to get visa, was sponsored by sister.

Guy from Columbia, came to the USA under a vacation visa, then got sponsored by a company in the USA and got his working Visa within 3 months.

though..I will admit that these are all Engineers, and the USA did make immigration much easier for these folks.
 
Last edited:
Nigerian. Got student visa in 6 months. Once he got here....he got it converted into a working visa. Seems like lots of folks go this route.
 

Back
Top Bottom