A discussion at work came up regarding running federal office and citizenship rules (no, this has nothing to do with Obama).
If a person holds dual citizenship in both the US and Canada, can that person run for federal office (President, Senate, House)?
Would they have to renounce their Canadian citizenship first?
Senator John McCain, having been born in Panama to US-citizen parents, would seem to be a dual American and Panamanian citizen. As far as I know, he hasn’t renounced his Panamanian citizenship, but hasn’t used it either. It doesn’t seem to have been an impediment to him being a US Senator, or to him being a candidate for President.
Does McCain actually have Panamanian citizenship? I’ve never heard anybody say that he does.
As far as the US law is concerned, there is no such thing as dual citizenship. According to the Department of State:
Thus, if you hold a US citizenship, and you do not renounce it, you are a US citizen.
Saying that the US permits (or ignores) dual citizenship doesn’t really answer the question. Australia allows dual citizenship, but members of the federal parliament are not allowed to be dual citizens, because of a clause in the Constitution forbidding it. Hence federal ministers of state cannot be dual citizens. I don’t think there is such a provision in U.S. law.
(And there aren’t provisions in state laws in Australia forbidding it. For example, the current Premier of New South Wales need not have renounced her U.S. citizenship before becoming a member of the N.S.W. Parliament and a minister of state in N.S.W. – she presumably did so because it would look better to the electorate.)
The requirements for serving in Congress or as President are set forth in the United States Constitution:
If it’s possible, under Canadian law, to be a citizen of Canada after seven or nine years as a citizen and inhabitant of the US, then yes, you can hold dual US/Canada citizenship and run for Congress. Since I know nothing about Canadian citizenship law, I don’t know whether it is in fact possible.
If it’s possible to be born in the US, reside here for at least 14 years, and still acquire or maintain Canadian citizenship, then yes, you can have dual US/Canada citizenship and run for President. Again, I have no idea whether that’s the case.
Time for my favorite nitpick: “natural born citizen” does not mean born in the US. You can be a natural-born citizen who was born elsewhere, like John McCain, or any number of other children born to American parents abroad.
The U.S. Constitution requires that the officers mentioned in the OP must be citizens of the United States*. It does not say that they may not be citizens of another country. Dual citizenship may present political obstacles, but I can’t see how a worthwhile case could be made that it affects one’s qualifications for office.
*Yes, with various restrictions – but those restrictions apply whether or not one has dual citizenship. For example, if a natural born U.S. citizen acquires an additional citizenship through marriage without renouncing U.S. citizenship, that person is still a natural born citizen. Someone who is not a natural born U.S. citizen who acquires U.S. citizenship while retaining another citizenship is still not a natural born citizen. The dual citizenship, in and of itself, is immaterial.
It is in fact possible; I’m still a Canadian citizen (along with my U.S. citizenship) even though I’ve lived in the United States for going on ten years now. I believe there are only two ways to involuntarily lose Canadian citizenship: 1) provide fraudulent information in the process of being naturalized, or 2) be born outside Canada to Canadian citizens who were themselves born outside Canada, and fail to apply to retain your citizenship before you turn 28. (The same applies if you have just one first-generation parent instead of two.)
friedo has already addressed the nitpick I was going to make, but for the sake of completeness: as noted above, if you’re a first-generation Canadian born abroad, you’re a Canadian citizen for life (barring specific renunciation.) If you’re second-generation and you don’t apply to retain your Canadian citizenship soon enough, you’re hosed. I would expect that taking specific actions to retain another country’s citizenship wouldn’t help one in a bid for the U.S. presidency, though.
Time for my favorite nitpick: it actually means nothing, as there is no Supreme Court case law on point.
Segues into my next point:
for elected positions, as has been correctly pointed out, the requirements of office are all that need to be met. I would submit, however, that in reality you’re going to have no choice but to renounce as your electability would be somewhere around 0 if you didn’t do so.
for appointed and/or civil service positions, some (that involve security clearances) require active renunciation of your foreign citizenship.
A Straight Dope Staff Report addresses many of the important issues in U.S. dual citizenship: How do you become a dual citizen?
If you are a U.S. citizen, you would lose your right to run for a U.S. office only if you did something that caused you to lose your U.S. Citizenship. As a Department of State webpage (linked in the Staff Report) notes:
POTENTIALLY EXPATRIATING ACTS
Section 349 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1481), as amended, states that U.S. citizens are subject to loss of citizenship if they perform certain specified acts voluntarily and with the intention to relinquish U.S. citizenship. Briefly stated, these acts include:
So long as a U.S. dual citizen has done none of those things “voluntarily and with the intention to relinquish U.S. citizenship,” he or she should be OK.
What if you voluntarily apply to become citizen of another country, but without the intention to relinquish U.S. citizenship? Does that wording allow you to pull it off?
ETA: On reading the link, the answer would appear to be “yes, that’s fine”. Good to know.
yes.
iirc, the state department’s policy is only to find “intent to relinquish” when you actually go and submit a form relinquishing citizenship. the default policy assumption is that you don’t intend to do so.
now, obviously, if you piss off the wrong bigwig in your life, they can attempt to make (literally) a federal case out of it, but…
And what if the politico’s other country does not permit (recognize) renunciation of citizenship?
Arnold Schwarzenegger has retained his Austrian citizenship, and if it was an issue in California, it wasn’t enough to prevent his election. I doubt if it would be any more of an issue if he ran for Congress. And of course he isn’t eligible to run for President either way.
ok, now replace “extremely popular international movie star” with “a normal politician” and see if the answer changes.
also, the facts of the Gray Davis recall weren’t really amenable to mud-slinging in the form of attacks on one’s loyalty
edit: I mean you are aware of the whole “birther” thing, right? where do you think these sentiments come from?
The Supreme Court has skirted this issue in various ways. For instance, in congressional limits, they ruled the constitution sets the minimal requirements and you can’t add to them, without an admendment.
So the line of reasoning would be similar, you have to meet the minimum qualifications set by the constitution to be president or a congressmen. No one can add to these, except by constitutional amendment.
Dual citizen here - naturalised Australian, born US.
It really gets fairly philosophical; the key phrases are “citizens are subject to loss of citizenship if they perform certain specified acts voluntarily and with the intention to relinquish U.S. citizenship” and (paraphrasing by memory) ‘engaging in acts that show an overriding allegiance to one country over the other’.
In the Australian rules (the latter); accepting a position in a policy-making arm of the government is incompatible with dual citizenship, as is becoming a commissioned officer. Both involve oaths to hold that nation’s interests over all others, or otherwise show an allegiance to one country over another.
Therefore, a dual Australian-US citizen could not accept an elected position in Congress without having to renounce his/her Australian citizenship, nor could they become an MP without renouncing US citizenship.
In practice, if you’re a dual citizen, I’d say avoid all elected positions, and the upper echelons of civil service to boot, if you want to retain both citizenships - assuming the rules are similar to those in Australia.
Apparently Panamanian citizenship by birth, which McCain would have (the Canal Zone being legally Panamanian territory, although under US administration), cannot be lost, although it can be suspended if renounced explicitly or implicitly. If McCain has never renounced it, it would seem he is legally a Panamanian citizen as far as Panama is concerned.
Personal note: I was born on a US military base overseas to US citizen parents, and I had birth certificates from that country and the US, and a certificate of citizenship from the US State Department, retroactive to the date of my birth.
No idea whether I could be sworn in as President. I had citizenship of both countries, but my understanding of the other country’s laws is that my citizenship there lapsed upon my 21st birthday.
I don’t think it’s clear that the Zone was Panamanian territory at the time. US law considered it an unincorporated US territory, but I don’t know what Panamanian law said. Its territorial status under US law meant that people born there were not automatically US citizens at birth (at least at first; Congress later passed a statute), but that doesn’t mean that they were necessarily Panamanian by birth either.