ILW.COM - the immigration portal Immigration Daily

Home Page


Immigration Daily

Archives

Processing times

Immigration forms

Discussion board

Resources

Blogs

Twitter feed

Immigrant Nation

Attorney2Attorney

CLE Workshops

Immigration books

Advertise on ILW

VIP Network

EB-5

移民日报

About ILW.COM

Connect to us

Make us Homepage

Questions/Comments


SUBSCRIBE

Immigration Daily


Chinese Immig. Daily




The leading
immigration law
publisher - over
50000 pages of
free information!
Copyright
© 1995-
ILW.COM,
American
Immigration LLC.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 13

Thread: Does this sound fair?

  1. #1
    Can anybody please explain to me why in these days of DNA testing, unmarried American fathers are still treated differently to unwed mothers when it comes to passing on citizenship? I am the adult daughter of a U.S. citizen father, who was told rather cruelly - despite having an American dad who has loved and supported me my whole life - that I cannot get an American passport because I was born out of wedlock. Then I found out that had my dad been a woman, I would have been considered a citizen from birth. How on earth are the immigration laws allowed to discriminate against people for reasons like this? Not all unmarried fathers are abandoning their foreign born children, my father is a great example - so why is the law set up to protect those who do?

  2. #2
    Can anybody please explain to me why in these days of DNA testing, unmarried American fathers are still treated differently to unwed mothers when it comes to passing on citizenship? I am the adult daughter of a U.S. citizen father, who was told rather cruelly - despite having an American dad who has loved and supported me my whole life - that I cannot get an American passport because I was born out of wedlock. Then I found out that had my dad been a woman, I would have been considered a citizen from birth. How on earth are the immigration laws allowed to discriminate against people for reasons like this? Not all unmarried fathers are abandoning their foreign born children, my father is a great example - so why is the law set up to protect those who do?

  3. #3
    U.S. immigration laws have changed overtime and no one knows what's going on at times.
    Before 1924 the case was exactly the opposite.
    If a child was born out of wedlock, the child could only get U.S. citizenship after the U.S. citizen father, but not the mother.
    I know this was the case with my grandmother who was born in the 1920's out of wedlock and could not only obtain citizenship after her USC father; her mother, my great grand mother was out of question. That was back then and no one knows why?

  4. #4
    Do you really wanna know why?
    OK, here's why:
    Immigration system doesn't consider it a good idea rewarding somebody with the US citizenship/passport when mother's consent to se.x that resulted in child's birth was "five dollah, please".

  5. #5
    I thought that if it can be proved that a "father-child" relationship was established before the child's eighteenth birtday, then the child could get citizenship. Hmmm. Maybe that's just necessary so that he can sponsor the child for PR?

    I don't think it's fair at all. Maybe they are trying to discourage foreign women from getting pregnant by Americans just to eventually gain access to this country? I don't know.
    Have a nice day

  6. #6
    I am sorry sup, but you have got me mad. I'm not gonna let you say that about my mother who has lived with my father and taken care of me my whole entire life. Not all illegitimate children are born as you put it "five dollah, please!" - so you should get that rather nasty and pathetic little thought right out of your head. I have a different theory... the immigration system gives American fathers the right to go spread their seed all over the world, and have the option to take no responsibility whatsoever - with their blessing. It's all be based on the old fashioned view that children are a woman's responsibility. Unfortunately us born with good decent fathers - like myself - are the victims in all of this. No matter how much evidence of a loving relationship we can provide. Our citizenship is taken away after a certain age - simply for not knowing that "illegitimate" people are treated differently in America.

  7. #7
    Sounds like you have a loving father who has been an important player in your life. At least you have that. There are a ton of "legitimate" children with US passports who have a very crumby relationship w/their father.
    Have a nice day

  8. #8
    Thanks for your response Gluhbirn. It's crazy isn't it. I've been sitting here desperately trying to look up information on the internet that might help me understand more as to why I was refused citizenship, and I'm not getting very far. Only positive thing I have managed to find in my favour is something called The Father's Equity Act.. a bill which was introduced by congresswoman Shiela Jackson-Lee last year I think, what has happened with this, anybody know?

  9. #9
    It does not sound fair, although, you must admit that laws pass for particular reasons. Part of your problem is the result of out-of-wedlock born children to U.S. service members during the Southeast Asia (a.k.a. Vietnam) conflict. A large amount of children were the result of prostution and abonedened by both their biological parents, the U.S. government granted them citizenship and took care of them in a 'humanitarian' gesture.

    Unfortunate for you that your father did not register you as your biological child with the State deprt. in the U.S. consulate when you were born. A surpreme court decision confirmed that binding, clear evidence must exist that emotional/financial support and close ties to you existed by your FATHER before you reached your 26th.

    I'm pressuming that he is not living at this time, as this will imensely complicate (but not make it impossible) for you to claim U.S. citizenship. Please read the following article and see if something applies to you there or consult a good attorney. Too many factor are involved that will determine if you can claim U.S. citizenship or not. Good luck!

    _______________________________________________

    On October 25, 1994, President Clinton signed into law the Immigration and Nationality Technical Corrections Act of 1994 (INTCA, Public Law No. 103-416). The law which was passed with little fanfare contains the most significant changes to the laws concerning the acquisition of citizenship in sixty years.

    THE LAW OF ACQUISITION OF CITIZENSHIP
    The immigration law has always allowed certain children born abroad to acquire citizenship at birth if one or both of the parents were U.S. citizens at the time of the child's birth. The laws governing the acquisition of citizenship at birth have been modified on numerous occasions.
    Before May 24, 1934, only citizen fathers of child born abroad could transmit citizenship to their offspring. After that date, the law was amended to allow citizen mothers and fathers to transmit U.S. citizenship to their children. However, this amendment was not retroactive. A child born abroad on May 23, 1934 whose mother was a U.S. citizen and whose father was an alien, did not become a U.S. citizen at birth like his counterpart who was lucky enough to be born a day later.

    Also, between 1934 and 1978, the law imposed a "retention" requirement upon children born abroad who had one parent who was a U.S. citizen and one parent who was an alien. Not only was the U.S. citizen parent required to reside in the U.S. for a fixed period of time before the child's birth, but the child was required to be present in the U.S. for a specific period of time during his youth. If a child failed to meet this retention requirement, she automatically lost his U.S. citizenship.

    THE COURTS INTERVENE
    A person born abroad before May 24, 1934 of a citizen mother and an alien father sued the State Department stating that the pre-1934 law denying him citizenship deprived him of the equal protection of the law. Why should he be treated any differently than a person with a citizen father and an alien mother? In 1993, a federal appeals court ruled in his favor.
    Regarding the retention requirement, the Supreme Court held in the 1970s that only Congress has the authority to impose or remove this requirement. In 1978, after the Court's decision, Congress amended the law to eliminate the retention requirement, but only for persons who had not already lost their citizenship due to their failure to meet the retention requirement.

    THE NEW LAW
    Section 101 of INTCA provides that children born abroad prior to May 24, 1934 of citizen mothers (who had resided in the U.S. prior to the child's birth) and alien fathers are citizens of the U.S. Furthermore, the law treats them as citizens as of the date of their birth. Whether they ever apply for U.S. passports or Certificates of Citizenships is immaterial. However, the law specifically makes persons who participated in Nazi persecutions or who have engaged in genocide ineligible for this benefit.
    Section 103 of INTCA allows persons who lost their U.S. citizenship between 1934 and 1978 due to their failure to satisfy the retention requirement the opportunity to regain their citizenship by taking an oath of allegiance to the U.S. Unlike section 101 which became effective on October 25, 1994, section 103's effective date is March 1, 1995.

    Thousands of persons born abroad and their spouses and children are expected to benefit from these amendments. Many of the persons who will benefit were born in countries bordering the U.S. (i.e., Canada and Mexico) or in countries which were previously territories of the U.S. such as the Philippines. However, the law contains no restrictions regarding the country of birth of the beneficiaries.

    WHO THE LAW BENEFITS
    For those not familiar with the laws governing the acquisition of citizenship, a few examples of who may be affected by the new law may be helpful:
    1. Mr. Suerte is a native and citizen of the Philippines. His maternal grandfather was a U.S.- born veteran of the Spanish-American War. His mother, who was born in the Philippines in 1900, acquired U.S. citizenship at birth through her father. Mr. Suerte was born in the Philippines in 1922 and has never been to the U.S. His mother was brought to the U.S. as a teenager by her father for a vacation.

    Mr. Suerte once tried to obtain a U.S. passport from the American Embassy in Manila. However, his application was rejected on the ground that U.S. citizen mothers could not transmit citizenship to their children born abroad before 1934.

    Under INTCA, Mr. Suerte may be issued a U.S. passport since he is considered to be a U.S. citizen at birth. He may apply for a green card for his wife as an "immediate relative" of a U.S. citizen.

    2. Ms. Smith is a native and citizen of Canada. Her father was born in the U.S. and her mother was born in Canada. Ms. Smith was born in 1950. Although she became a citizen of the U.S. at birth through her father (who had lived in the U.S. for a period of time before her birth, thereby satisfying the law's physical presence requirements), she lost her citizenship by her failure to meet the retention requirement.

    Now, she can regain her U.S. citizenship by taking an oath of allegiance to the U.S. Once she is in possession of a U.S. passport, she may immediately apply for permanent residence for her husband and two children.

    3. Mr. Patel is a native and citizen of India. His maternal grandmother was born in the U.S. His mother was born in India in 1936 and has never come to the U.S. Mr. Patel was born in India in 1967 and is a graduate student at USC. He desires to live permanently in the U.S. He has heard that the best way of doing so is to obtain practical training after graduation, to change his status to H-1B and then to have his employer sponsor him for permanent residence.

    Under INTCA, Mr. Patel's mother can obtain U.S. citizenship through her mother. Then she can petition for her son to obtain a green card under the family-based first preference category if he is single, or under the third preference category if he is married.

    CONCLUSION
    Anyone who has a U.S. citizen parent, grandparent or in-law, whether living or deceased, should obtain a legal opinion as to the effect of INTCA on their immigration status if they wish to live in the U.S. Instead of a lengthy wait for a green card, they may be immediately eligible for U.S. citizenship.

  10. #10
    Wow thanks for all that Pandora. Thankfully my father is still alive, he was the one who took me to the U.S. Consulate to apply for the passport. All they told us was that because I had not been legitimized before turning 21, I don't qualify. Even though my dad signed my birth certificate when I was born - but apparently this isn't the kind of evidence they're looking for. I mean, come on, who in a happy relationship bothers to go to a court and to take an oath to prove themselves as the father? it just doesn't happen. Why isn't a legal birth certificate, an affidavit from dad and a blood test enough? It just feels like they're deliberately making things harder than they need to be. My father always just assumed I'd be a citizen from birth as he easily met all the physical presence requirements before I was born. But this apparently still counts for nothing when you're "illegitimate." I know I could easily go down the green card path, but to be honest it just seems so unfair and unnecessary. I'm definitely thinking of saving up for a consultation with an immigration attorney - who knows, maybe in a couple of years I'll actually be able to afford it, hehe. Anyways, I've had my vent, thanks for reading this and responding. If anybody out there has anything else to add to this, please do, I feel like I need all the advice I can get.

Similar Threads

  1. There has to be a fair balance
    By cwalker3 in forum Immigration Discussion
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 05-15-2006, 02:40 PM
  2. FAIR MEMO
    By Epiclaughter in forum Immigration Discussion
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 04-02-2005, 09:22 AM
  3. Replies: 11
    Last Post: 07-06-2003, 09:26 PM
  4. this might sound crazy
    By in forum Immigration Discussion
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 06-04-2003, 08:08 PM
  5. Does this sound right??
    By in forum Immigration Discussion
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: 02-14-2003, 09:08 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Put Free Immigration Law Headlines On Your Website

Immigration Daily: the news source for legal professionals. Free! Join 35000+ readers Enter your email address here: