Citizenship in the United States

Citizenship in the United States is a legal marker denoting political membership in the United States that entails specific rights and privileges and duties. Citizenship is understood as a "right to have rights" since it serves as a foundation for a bundle of subsequent rights, such as the right to live and work in the United States and to receive federal assistance.^[2]

There are two primary sources of citizenship: birthright citizenship, in which a person is presumed to be a citizen provided that he or she is born within the territorial limits of the United States,^[3] and naturalization, a process in which an immigrant applies for citizenship and is accepted. These two pathways to citizenship are specified in the Citizenship Clause of the Constitution's Fourteenth Amendment which reads:

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.

—from the Fourteenth Amendment.

National citizenship signifies membership in the country as a whole; state citizenship, in contrast, signifies a relation between a person and a particular state and has limited application, generally, with some exceptions being that state citizenship may affect (1) tax decisions and (2) eligibility for some state-provided benefits such as higher education and (3) eligibility for state political posts such as U.S. Senator.

In Article One of the Constitution, the power to establish a "uniform rule of naturalization" is granted explicitly to Congress. Most persons who undergo naturalization do so to get permission to live and work in the nation legally.

American law permits multiple citizenship, so a citizen of another country may retain their native citizenship after becoming a citizen of the United States. The reverse is not necessarily true, however; one cannot always maintain U.S. citizenship after attaining citizenship of another country.^[4] Citizenship can be renounced by citizens,^[5] and it can also be restored.^[6]

Relation of citizenship

The concept of citizenship has varied in different cultures and times. The Athenian citizen-soldier model required civic participation as well as a duty to fight as part of a well-coordinated phalanx. Roman citizenship was a prized distinction in the early years of the Republic which also entailed a military commitment. In the United States today, however, citizenship entails few commitments to other citizens or to government; there is no military requirement or call for civic participation. Rather, citizenship is the legal status of membership in the United States. Citizens have the right to live and work without fear of deportation. The activities typically associated with citizenship typically include duties and privileges.

In the United States today, everyone except those whose income is derived from tax exempt revenue (Subchapter N, Section 861 of the US Tax Code) is required to pay taxes, and this has been the case for many years. The U.S. requires that aliens who are present in the United States, including non-immigrants and illegal immigrants, for more than 180 days must file tax returns.^[7] American citizens are subject to taxes wherever they go in the world.^[8] Since the United States requires citizens living abroad to file taxes, some Americans renounce their citizenship as a way to cope with the administrative burden of filing complex tax forms.^[9] In 2003, there were 509 Americans who renounced citizenship.^[9] In 2007, 470 Americans renounced their citizenship to move abroad.^[8] One estimate was that the numbers of Americans turning in their passports each year for political and economic reasons was small, with the numbers reaching a high of about 2,000 during a Vietnam War-era boom in the 1970s.^[9] One lawyer commented that the "administrative costs of being an American and living outside the U.S. have gone up dramatically."^[9] One account suggested that increased "taxation is driving many Americans to turn in their passports."^[9] But Congress passed rules to tax assets on so-called tax exiles or renunciators of American citizenship, who abandon US citizenship for tax purposes, as well as tax any heirs or beneficiaries of those people who still live in the territorial United States.^[8] According to a tax accountant, "The new rules say, if you leave any of your property to a U.S. person, it will be taxed at the rates for U.S. gift tax", which were 45% in 2008.^[8]

Duties

• Jury duty is only imposed upon citizens. Jury duty may be considered the "sole differential obligation" between non-citizens and citizens; the federal and state courts "uniformly exclude non-citizens from jury pools today, and with the exception of a few states in the past, this has always been the case.^[10] Today there are indications jury duty is declining;^[11] there are fewer trials. Newspaper reports have chronicled the decline of juries, and noted how many people don't get summonses, and how Americans see jury duty as an "inconvenient" chore.^[11]

• Military participation is not currently required in the United States, but a policy of conscription of men has been in place at various times (both in war and in peace) in American history, most recently during the Vietnam War. Currently, the United States armed forces are a professional all-volunteer force, although both male U.S. citizens and male non-citizen permanent residents are required to register with the Selective Service System and may be called up in the event of a future draft. Johns Hopkins University political scientist Benjamin Ginsberg wrote "the professional military has limited the need for citizen soldiers."^[2]

Rights

• Freedom to reside and work. United States citizens have the right to reside and work in the United States. Certain non-citizens, such as permanent residents, have similar rights. However, non-citizens, unlike citizens, may have the right taken away: for example, they may be deported if convicted of a serious crime. There are many jobs, opportunities, and educational opportunities. Some immigrants see citizenship as a way of "locking in economic gains that they have made as legal residents."^[12] One person said "People don’t feel that being permanent residents is enough to secure their future in this country. They would just feel more secure as citizens."^[12]

• Freedom to enter and leave the United States. United States citizens have the right to enter and leave the United States freely. Certain non-citizens, such as permanent residents, have similar rights.

• Voting for federal office is restricted to citizens in all fifty states and the District of Columbia. States are not required to extend the franchise to all citizens: for example, several states bar citizen felons from voting, even after they have completed any custodial sentence. The United States Constitution bars states from restricting citizens from voting on grounds of race, color, previous condition of servitude, sex, failure to pay any tax, or age (for citizens who are at least eighteen years old). Historically, many states and local jurisdictions have allowed non-citizens to vote; however, today this is limited to local elections in very few places. Voting is not required, unlike nations such as Australia and Belgium where citizens can be fined for failing to vote. Historically, voting rates in presidential elections by eligible citizens hover around the 50% level, although the recent election of Barack Obama in 2008 saw levels rise over 60%. Legal immigrants are sometimes motivated to become citizens for a chance to exercise voting power.^[12]

• Freedom to stand for public office. The United States Constitution requires that all members of the United States House of Representatives have been citizens for seven years, and that all senators have been citizens for nine years, before taking office. Most states have similar requirements: for example California requires that legislators have been citizens for three years, and the Governor have been a citizen for five years, upon taking office. The U.S. Constitution requires that one be "a natural born Citizen" and a U.S. resident for fourteen years in order to be President of the United States.

The Constitution also stipulates that otherwise eligible citizens must be at least 35 years old to be eligible to be president, at least 25 years old to be a member of the U.S. House of Representatives, and at least 30 years old to be a U.S. Senator.

Substantial benefits

• Consular protection outside the United States. While traveling abroad, if a person is arrested or detained by foreign authorities, the person can request to speak to somebody from the U.S. Embassy or Consulate. Consular officials can provide resources for Americans incarcerated abroad, such as a list of local attorneys who speak English. The U.S. government may even intervene on the person's behalf.^[13] For example, an American citizen named William E. Petty, who was jailed by authorities in France in 1854, petitioned U.S. authorities to intervene on his behalf.^[14] In a twist of this principle, it's possible for foreign governments to confer citizenship on persons serving in jails in the United States.^[15] But it illustrates how citizenship is a way to try to extend the hand of protection to nationals when incarcerated in foreign jails.

• Access to social services. Many social services in the United States are only eligible to American citizens.^[13]

• Increased ability to sponsor relatives living abroad.^[13] Several types of immigrant visas require that the person requesting the visa be directly related to a U.S. citizen. Having U.S. citizenship facilitates the granting of IR and F visas to family members.

• Protection from deportation.^[12][13] Naturalized U.S. citizens are no longer considered aliens and cannot be placed into deportation proceedings.

• Other benefits. The USCIS sometimes honors the achievements of naturalized U.S. citizens. The 'Outstanding American by Choice Award' was created by the USCIS to recognize the outstanding achievements of naturalized U.S. citizens, and past recipients include author Elie Wiesel who won the Nobel Peace Prize; Indra K. Nooyi who is CEO of PepsiCo; John Shalikashvili who was Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff; and others.^[16] Further, citizenship status can affect which country an athlete can compete as a member of in competitions such as the Olympics.^[17]

Civic participation

Civic participation is not required in the United States. There is no requirement to attend town meetings, read newspapers, stay informed about issues, belong to a political party, or write letters; citizens can stay home and do nothing if they choose. One source suggested that a benefit of naturalization is letting immigrants "participate fully in the civic life of the country."^[13] There is disagreement about whether popular lack of involvement in politics is helpful or harmful. Vanderbilt professor Dana D. Nelson suggests that most Americans merely vote for president every four years, and that's all they do, and she sees this pattern as undemocratic. In her book Bad for Democracy, Nelson argues that declining citizen participation in politics is unhealthy for long term prospects for democracy. Generally, civic participation is almost nonexistent for wide swaths of the American public.^[18] One 2009 study found that seven in ten citizens showed "declining civic involvement" nationally, and that citizens of Illinois were "disappointed, frustrated and disillusioned by recent political scandals and the pressures of the recession."^[18] However, writers such as Robert D. Kaplan in The Atlantic see benefits to non-involvement; he wrote "the very indifference of most people allows for a calm and healthy political climate."^[19] Kaplan elaborated: "Apathy, after all, often means that the political situation is healthy enough to be ignored. The last thing America needs is more voters–particularly badly educated and alienated ones–with a passion for politics."^[19] He argued that civic participation, in itself, is not always a sufficient condition to bring good outcomes, and pointed to authoritarian societies such as Singapore which prospered because it had "relative safety from corruption, from breach of contract, from property expropriation, and from bureaucratic inefficiency."^[20]

Dual citizenship

A person who is considered a citizen by more than one nation has dual citizenship. It is possible for a United States citizen to have dual citizenship, for example by birth in the United States to a parent who is a citizen of a foreign country. Anyone who becomes a naturalized U.S. citizen is required to renounce any prior citizenship during the naturalization ceremony;^[21] however, this renunciation may not necessarily be considered effective by the country of prior citizenship. United States citizens are required by federal law to identify themselves with a U.S. passport, not with any foreign passport, when entering the US. The Supreme Court case of Afroyim v. Rusk declared that a U.S. citizen did not lose his citizenship by voting in an election in a foreign country, or by acquiring foreign citizenship, if such acts did not require him to explicitly renounce his U.S. citizenship.

The concept of dual citizenship (while not unique to the U.S.) has been the subject of controversy in the U.S. Michael Barone in US News argued that "dual citizenship is a threat to the American tradition of patriotic assimilation" as well as possibly undermining American sovereignty,^[22] while others have argued that the effects are less pernicious.^[22] Americans who have dual citizenship do not lose their United States citizenship unless they renounce it officially.^[23] When Mexico allowed people to become dual citizens, many Mexican-born American residents sought dual citizenship; in this case, dual citizenship with Mexico and the US. This dual status offers benefits such as the ability to own property anywhere in Mexico, and legal status to live and work in either country; but one drawback is that dual citizens cannot hold political office in Mexico.^[23] Before 1998, many Mexicans were reluctant to become United States citizens, fearing they would lose real estate, inheritances or businesses in Mexico.^[23] In 2003 in the United States, there were 32.8 million Hispanics; of these, 21.7 million were from Mexico or had Mexican heritage; of these, 7.8 million had been born in Mexico; and of these, 1.6 million had become American citizens; of these, 30,000 had become dual citizens from 2000 to 2003.^[23]

History of citizenship in the United States

Citizenship began in colonial times as an active relation between people working cooperatively to solve municipal problems and participating actively in democratic decision-making, such as in New England town hall meetings. People met regularly to discuss local affairs and make decisions. These town meetings were described as the "earliest form of American democracy"^[24] which was vital since citizen participation in public affairs helped keep democracy "sturdy", according to Alexis de Tocqueville in 1835.^[25] A variety of forces changed this relation during the nation's history, including specialization of people into more focused roles which didn't include civic participation, government centralization, technological change, media exposure, prosperity, increased mobility making civic participation more difficult, and so forth. Attendance at town meetings dwindled.^[26] Voting declined.^[27] Citizenship became less defined by participation in politics and more defined as a legal relation with accompanying rights and privileges. While the realm of civic participation in the public sphere has shrunk,^[28][29][30] the citizenship franchise has been expanded^[31] to include not just propertied white adult men but African-American men^[32] and adult women.^[33] Thinkers such as Robert Kaplan,^[34] Naomi Wolf,^[30] Dana D. Nelson^[35] and others have suggested that the decline of citizenship may pose problems for democracy in the future. Nevertheless, a continuing benefit of citizenship offers a chance to participate in a dynamic economic marketplace.

Birthright citizenship

U.S. citizenship is usually acquired by birth when a child is born in the territory of the United States. In addition to the U.S. States, this includes the District of Columbia, Guam, Puerto Rico, the Northern Mariana Islands and the U.S. Virgin Islands.^[36][37][38] This is provided under the 14th Amendment. Citizenship, however, was not specified in the original Constitution. It was not until 1868 that the Fourteenth Amendment defined citizens as persons who were either born or naturalized in the United States and subject to its jurisdiction. All babies born in the United States–except those born to enemy aliens in wartime or the children of foreign diplomats–enjoy American citizenship under the Supreme Court's long-standing interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment.^[39] It says: "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside."^[39] Still, the amendment did not specify exactly what the relation of "citizenship" meant.

Some, but not all, children born outside the United States with at least one U.S. citizen parent have birthright citizenship by parentage.

While persons born in the United States are considered to be citizens and can have passports, children under age eighteen are legally considered to be minors and cannot vote or hold office. Upon the event of their eighteenth birthday, they are considered full citizens but there is no ceremony acknowledging this relation or any correspondence between the new citizen and the government to this effect. Citizenship is assumed to exist, and the relation is assumed to remain viable until death or until it is renounced or dissolved by some other legal process. While citizenship poses few requirements or duties, secondary schools teach the basics of citizenship and create "informed and responsible citizens" who are "skilled in the arts of effective deliberation and action."^[40] Teachers try to encourage students to believe that "their ballots count."^[40]

However, there have been a few exceptions in which people born in the United States were not officially considered to be citizens. For example, in 1985, a renegade band of 143 Kickapoo Indians were naturalized; they had been living under an expressway bridge to Piedras Negras in Mexico.^[41]

One controversial practice is maternity citizenship. It refers to the fact that babies born to foreign women while visiting the United States are automatically considered to have birthright citizenship.^[42] It has been criticized as encouraging women to enter the country illegally to give birth to U.S. citizens; by one estimate, there were 400,000 so-called anchor babies born in 2008 of whom neither parent was a United States citizen.^[42] The policy has been criticized further as an "antiquated practice" in which the baby becomes an "anchor" preventing deportation of "unlawfully present parents" and becomes an impediment to stabilizing the U.S. population.^[42] However, proposals to further the Birthright Citizenship Act of 2009 (H.R. 1868) have been criticized as being "beside the point" and that the real reason for illegal immigration is based on the need for employment.^[42] 2008 presidential candidate Mitt Romney argued that birthright citizenship can lead to chain migration in which a child born in the US to illegal immigrants permits an entire family to become eligible for American citizenship as a result.^[39] What is notable regarding this is that people seeking entry into the United States by virtue of a family member's citizenship still require a sponsor, and an anchor baby does not meet the financial qualifications to be a sponsor.^[43] Constitutional scholars have debated whether it's possible to end birthright citizenship through legislation or whether it requires a constitutional amendment.^[39]

But the opposite situation, in which an American couple adopted a foreign-born child, used to mean huge headaches after the adoption process in terms of getting the foreign-born child recognized as a citizen. However, the Child Citizenship Act of 2000, which took effect in February 2001, made it easier for parents adopting children in foreign countries to naturalize them.^[44] Up until the law, "parents of youngsters adopted overseas were required to undergo a costly and cumbersome naturalization process that sometimes took two years to complete" in addition to usually complex international adoption procedures; the new law meant that 75,000 adopted foreign-born children automatically became citizens.^[44] One estimate was that, in 2001, there were about 20,000 such adoptions every year, and the average wait for citizenship processing by the Immigration and Naturalization Service had been two years.^[44] But with the new law, that process will be shortened considerably.

Americans who live in foreign countries and become members of other governments have, in some instances, been stripped of citizenship, although there have been court cases where decisions regarding citizenship have been reversed.^[45]

Naturalized citizenship

Agency in charge

The agency in charge of admitting new citizens is the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services, commonly abbreviated as USCIS.^[46] It is a bureau of the Department of Homeland Security. It offers web-based services.^[47] The agency depends on application fees for revenue; in 2009, with a struggling economy, applications were down sharply, and consequently there was much less revenue to upgrade and streamline services.^[47] There was speculation that if the administration of president Barack Obama passes immigration reform, then the agency could face a "welcome but overwhelming surge of Americans-in-waiting" and longer processing times for citizenship applications.^[47] The USCIS has made efforts to digitize records.^[48] A USCIS website says the "U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) is committed to offering the best possible service to you, our customer"^[49] and which says "With our focus on customer service, we offer you a variety of services both before and after you file your case."^[49] The website allowed applicants to estimate the length of time required to process specific types of cases, to check application status, and to access a customer guide.^[49] The USCIS processes cases in the order they're received.^[49]

Pathways to citizenship

• Requirements. People applying to become citizens must satisfy certain requirements. For example, there have been requirements for applicants to have lived in the nation for five years (three if married to a U.S. citizen,) be of "good moral character" meaning no felony convictions, be of "sound mind" in the judgment of immigration officials, have knowledge of the Constitution, and be able to speak and understand English unless they're elderly or disabled.^[50]

• Military participation is often a way for immigrant residents to become citizens. Since many people seek citizenship for its financial and social benefits, the promise of citizenship can be seen as a means of motivating persons to do dangerous activities such as fight in wars. For example, one account suggested the United States Military was recruiting "skilled immigrants who are living in this country with temporary visas" by promising an opportunity to become citizens "in as little as six months" in exchange for service in Afghanistan and Iraq where US forces are "stretched thin."^[51] The option was not open to illegal immigrants.^[51] One estimate was that in 2009 the US military had 29,000 foreign-born people currently serving who were not American citizens.^[51] Generally, spouses of citizens, and non-citizens who served in the military, have less difficulty becoming citizens. Generally there is a strong link between military service and citizenship. One analyst noted that "many immigrants, not yet citizens, have volunteered to serve in the United States military forces ... Some have been killed and others wounded ... Perhaps this can be seen as a cynical attempt to qualify more easily for U.S. citizenship ... But I think that service in the U.S. military has to be taken as a pretty serious commitment to the United States."^[22] Immigrant soldiers who fight for the US often have an easier and faster path to citizenship.^[52] In 2002, President Bush signed an executive order to eliminate the three-year waiting period and made service personnel immediately eligible for citizenship.^[52] In 2003, Congress voted to "cut the waiting period to become a citizen from three years down to one year" for immigrants who had served in the armed forces.^[52] In 2003, of 1.4 million service members, 37,000 active-duty members were not citizens, and of these, 20 percent had applied for citizenship.^[52] By June 2003, 12 non-citizens had died fighting for the United States in the Iraqi war.^[52] The military has had a tradition of "filling out its ranks" with aliens living in the U.S.^[53] Non-citizens fought in World War II.^[53] The military has struggled to "fill its depleted ranks" by recruiting more non-US citizens.^[54] But there is considerable anxiety about using foreigners to serve in the U.S. armed forces. General Dwight D. Eisenhower was quoted as saying: "When Rome went out and hired mercenary soldiers, Rome fell."^[53]

• Grandparent rule. One obscure ruling of section 322 of a 1994 immigration law enabled persons to emigrate to the United States if they could prove that a grandparent was a citizen.^[55] In 2006, there were 4,000 applications of citizenship through grandparents. While parents of any nationality can use the law, Israelis comprise 90% of those taking advantage of the clause.^[55]

• Amnesties have happened in the past in which illegal residents could petition for citizenship if they could prove that they had been living in the nation for a specified number of years.

• Citizenship test. Last, applicants must pass a simple citizenship test.^[50] Up until recently, a test published by the Immigration and Naturalization Service asked questions such as "How many stars are there in our flag?" and "What is the Constitution?" and "Who is the president of the United States today?"^[50] At one point, the Government Printing Office sold flashcards for $8.50 to help test takers prepare for the test.^[56] In 2006, the government replaced the former trivia test with a ten-question oral test designed to "shun simple historical facts about America that can be recounted in a few words for more explanation about the principles of American democracy, such as freedom."^[46] One reviewer described the new citizenship test as "thoughtful."^[47] While some have criticized the new version of the test, officials counter that the new test is a "teachable moment" without making it conceptually more difficult, since the list of possible questions and answers, as before, will be publicly available.^[46] Six correct answers constitutes a passing grade.^[46] The new test probes for signs that immigrants "understand and share American values."^[46]

Strong demand

According to a senior fellow at the Migration Policy Institute, "Citizenship is a very, very valuable commodity."^[57] However, one study suggested legal residents eligible for citizenship, but who don't apply, tend to have low incomes (41 percent), do not speak English well (60 percent), or have low levels of education (25 percent).^[13] There is strong demand for citizenship based on the numbers of applications filed.^[57] From 1920 to 1940, the number of immigrants to the United States who became citizens numbered about 200,000 each year; there was a spike after World War II, and then the level reduced to about 150,000 per year until resuming to the 200,000 level beginning about 1980.^[58] In the mid-1990s to 2009, the levels rose to about 500,000 per year with considerable variation.^[58] In 1996, more than one million people became citizens through naturalization.^[59] In 1997, there were 1.41 million applications filed; in 2006, 1.38 million.^[57] In the mid-1990s, the number of naturalized citizens in the United States rose from 6.5 million to 11 million in 2002.^[60] By 2003, the pool of immigrants eligible to become naturalized citizens was 8 million, and of these, 2.7 million lived in California.^[60] In 2003, the number of new citizens from naturalization was 463,204.^[12] In 2007, the number was 702,589.^[12] In 2007, 1.38 million people applied for citizenship creating a backlog.^[57] In 2008, applications decreased to 525,786.^[57]

Naturalization fees were $60 in 1989; $90 in 1991; $95 in 1994; $225 in 1999; $260 in 2002; $320 in 2003; $330 in 2005.^[61] Application fees were increased from $330 to $595 and an additional $80 computerized fingerprinting fee was added.^[57] The high fees have been criticized as putting up one more wall to citizenship.^[46] Increases in fees for citizenship have drawn criticism.^[62] Doris Meissner, a senior fellow at the Migration Policy Institute and former Immigration and Naturalization Service Commissioner, doubted that fee increases deter citizenship-seekers.^[57] In 2009, the number of immigrants applying for citizenship plunged 62 percent; reasons cited were the slowing economy and the cost of naturalization.^[57]

Citizenship ceremonies

The citizenship process has been described as a ritual that is meaningful for many immigrants.^[46] Many new citizens are sworn in during Fourth of July ceremonies.^[12] Most citizenship ceremonies take place at offices of the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services.^[6] However, one swearing-in ceremony was held at Arlington National Cemetery in Virginia in 2008.^[6] The judge who chose this venue explained: "I did it to honor our country's warriors and to give the new citizens a sense for what makes this country great."^[6] According to federal law, citizenship applicants who are also changing their names must appear before a federal judge.^[6]

Honorary citizenship

The title of "Honorary Citizen of the United States" has been granted seven times by an act of Congress or by a proclamation issued by the President pursuant to authorization granted by Congress. The seven individuals are Sir Winston Churchill, Raoul Wallenberg, William Penn, Hannah Callowhill Penn, Mother Teresa, the Marquis de Lafayette, and Casimir Pulaski.

Sometimes, the government awarded non-citizen immigrants who died fighting for American forces with the posthumous title of U.S. citizenship, but this is not considered honorary citizenship.^[52] In June 2003, Congress approved legislation to help families of fallen non-citizen soldiers.^[52]

Corporate citizenship

There is a sense in which corporations can be considered as "citizens." Since corporations are often thought of as individuals in the eyes of the law, then it is possible to think of corporations as being like citizens. For example, the airline Virgin America asked the United States Department of Transportation to be treated as an American air carrier.^[63] The advantage of "citizenship" is having the protection and support of the United States government when jockeying with foreign governments for access to air routes and overseas airports.^[63] A competitor of Virgin America called Alaska Airlines asked for a review of the situation; according to "U.S. law, foreign ownership in a U.S. air carrier is limited to 25% of the voting interest in the carrier", but executives at Virgin America insisted the airline met this requirement.^[63]

For the purposes of diversity jurisdiction in United States civil procedure, corporate citizenship is determined by the principal place of business of the corporation. There is some degree of disagreement among legal authorities as to how exactly this may be determined.

Another sense of "corporate citizenship" is a way to show support for causes such as social issues and the environment and, indirectly, gain a kind of "reputational advantage."^[64]

Controversies

The issue of citizenship naturalization is a highly contentious matter in American politics, particularly regarding illegal immigrants. Candidates in the 2008 presidential election such as Rudolph Giuliani tried to "carve out a middle ground" on the issue of illegal immigration, but rivals such as John McCain advocated legislation requiring illegal immigrants to first leave the country before being eligible to apply as citizens.^[65] Some measures to require proof of citizenship at polling places have met with controversy.^[66] In the past, some rulings have prevented homosexuals from entering the nation and applying for citizenship.^[67]

Issues such as whether to include questions about current citizenship status in census questions have been debated in the Senate.^[50] Generally, there tends to be controversy when citizenship impacts political issues. For example, issues such as asking questions about citizenship on the United States Census tend to cause controversy.^[68] Census data affects state electoral clout; it also affects budgetary allocations.^[68]

There have been controversies based on speculation about which way newly naturalized citizens are likely to vote. Since immigrants from many countries have been presumed to vote Democratic if naturalized, there have been efforts by Democratic administrations to streamline citizenship applications before elections to increase turnout; Republicans, in contrast, have exerted pressure to slow down the process.^[69] In 1997, there were efforts to strip the citizenship of 5,000 newly approved immigrants who, it was thought, had been "wrongly naturalized"; a legal effort to do this presented enormous challenges.^[69] An examination by the Immigration and Naturalization Service of 1.1 million people who were granted citizenship from September 1995 to September 1996 found 4,946 cases in which a criminal arrest should have disqualified an applicant or in which an applicant lied about his or her criminal history.^[69] Before the 2008 election, there was controversy about the speed of the USCIS in processing applications; one report suggested that the agency would complete 930,000 applications in time for the newly processed citizens to vote in the November 2008 election.^[70] Foreign-born naturalized citizens tend to vote at the same rates as natives. For example, in the state of New Jersey in the 2008 election, the foreign born represented 20.1 percent of the state's population of 8,754,560; of these, 636,000 were eighteen or older and hence eligible to vote; of eligible voters, 396,000 actually voted, which was about 62%.^[71] So foreign-born citizens vote in roughly the same proportion (62%) as native citizens (67%).^[71]

There has been controversy about the agency in charge of citizenship. The USCIS has been criticized as being a "notoriously surly, inattentive bureaucracy" with long backlogs in which "would-be citizens spent years waiting for paperwork."^[47] Rules made by United States Congress and the federal government regarding citizenship are highly technical and often confusing, and the agency is forced to cope with enforcement within a complex regulatory milieu. There have been instances in which applicants for citizenship have been deported on technicalities.^[72] One Pennsylvania doctor and his wife, both from the Philippines who applied for citizenship, and one Mr. Darnell from Canada who was married to an American with two children from this marriage, ran afoul of legal technicalities and faced deportation.^[72] The New York Times reported that "Mr. Darnell discovered that a 10-year-old conviction for domestic violence involving a former girlfriend, even though it had been reduced to a misdemeanor and erased from his public record, made him ineligible to become a citizen–or even to continue living in the United States."^[72] Overworked federal examiners under pressure to make "quick decisions" as well as "weed out security risks" have been described as preferring "to err on the side of rejection."^[72] In 2000, 399,670 applications were denied (about 1/3 of all applications); in 2007, 89,683 applications for naturalization were denied, about 12 percent of those presented.^[72]

Generally, eligibility for citizenship is denied for the millions of people living in the United States illegally, although from time to time, there have been amnesties. In 2006, there were mass protests numbering hundreds of thousands of people throughout the US demanding U.S. citizenship for illegal immigrants.^[73] Many carried banners which read "We Have A Dream Too."^[73] One estimate is that there are 12 million illegal immigrants in the USA in 2006.^[73] There are many American high school students with citizenship issues.^[74] One estimate is that there are 65,000 illegal immigrant students in 2008.^[74] A 1982 Supreme Court decision entitled illegal immigrants to free education from kindergarten through high school.^[74] But it is less clear about post-secondary education.

Illegal aliens who get caught in the gears of the justice system face horrendous odds; for example, if their lawyer makes a mistake during a hearing, they have no constitutional right to challenge the outcome of their deportation hearings.^[75] Writer Tom Barry of the Boston Review criticizes the crackdown against illegal immigrants since it has "flooded the federal courts with nonviolent offenders, besieged poor communities, and dramatically increased the U.S. prison population, while doing little to solve the problem itself."^[76] Barry criticizes the United States' high incarceration rate as being "fives times greater than the average rate in the rest of the world."^[76] Virginia Senator Jim Webb agreed that we are "doing something dramatically wrong in our criminal justice system."^[76]

See also

• Anchor baby
• Birth tourism
• Birthright citizenship in the United States of America
• Birthright generation
• Citizenship (general discussion for all nations)
• Jus soli
• Natural born citizen of the United States
• United States nationality law

References

External links

• How to Become a US citizen - an article on the process of becoming a US citizen
• U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services - Citizenship Resource Center
• Study materials for the U.S. citizenship civics test