Unless you are talking purely about lawyers working for the NSA, this is not true. Several lawyers of my personal and/or professional acquaintance are not U.S. citizens at all, let alone dual citizens. There is no requirement even to be a permanent resident to practice law in the U.S. I’ve done work visas (H-1B and TN) for attorneys. As long as they meet the educational and/or licensure requirements to practice law in a given state, they can do so regardless of citizenship status.
Wait, I believe the mention of “lawyers” in the OP was an attempt to establish some sort of conflict-of-interest analogy in regards to “serving two masters”, probably in the sense that professional ethics require self-recusal in the case of even the appearance of such conflict. (Man, this thread seems destined to drift off into tangents centered on anything a poster mentions in passing…).
I don’t know if the general tone of the OP is really all that GQ, seems more like asking for opinion about or defense of the justification for the practice, than the factual legal reason it is allowed.
I am confused about this statement, could you clarify? My boyfriend is a lawyer for the government and he has dual citizenship…
[sidenote]I don’t think that’s precise. My wife is an American citizen, but our kids are not, and will not be unless they live for a period of time in the states (I don’t recall the exact period, but it’s measured in years). [/sidenote]
Puzzler, I don’t see any mention of that in this State Department webpage.
One of my first roomies in Miami was a blonde, blue-eyed, “please cast her for all-American role” girl born in Colombia of American parents. She was always getting crap from credit companies and whatnot asking for her never-existant green card; she was American by birth, but they wouldn’t accept that you can be born outside the US and be an American citizen. We were buying some stuff for the apartment, and I, a foreigner who’d been in the country for less than two weeks, needed to produce less documents than she did, in order to run the store’s credit gauntlet :smack:
Sort-of, Kind-of. The children must have a parent or a grandparent who is/was
- A “natural-born” citizen of the US (i.e., wasn’t naturalized themselves; I don’t think that means “Born in the USA” – but I’m not sure.)
- Lived at least 10 years in the US, of which 5 years after the age of 14.
They don’t have to live in the US for any period of time themselves, unless they plan on having their own children become US citizens, too (or maybe that won’t work either, if “natural-born citizen” means “born in the USA,” rather than “acquired citizenship by right of birth rather than by naturalization”). Actually, if your wife has the residence requirements, your grandchildren may still be eligible anyway.
Nava The relevant bit in the web-page you linked is article 4:
From personal experience (my children are receiving their papers this summer, based on my mother’s “residence and physical presence”), the “Grandfather” clause to this law, while not spelled out on this particular web page, does work.
Oh, I see. Thank you. My wife was born in the USA, but left at the age of two, and never lived there again. So I guess our kids lost their chance…
What about her parents?
I’ve been through all the hoops… if you want, e-mail or PM me.
Thanks. Check your PM.
No, no, you’re still misunderstanding, I think. Since your wife was born in the U.S., the residency thing does not apply to her. Your children are U.S. citizens. Having been born outside the U.S., the residency thing does apply to them, and your grandchildren will not be U.S. citizens unless your kids establish residency.
You have to get the certificate of foreign birth from the consulate before they are 18 though, Puzzler. Are they over the age of 18? If not, you can still apply for this certificate, which establishes their citizenship.
All of them are under 18. My wife told me she phoned the embassy here, and was told she needs to meet the residency criterion.
With the help of Noone Special, I’ll to talk to a lawyer about it.
OK, it’s not you that’s misunderstanding, it’s the embassy. Good luck.
This is incorrect. The residency requirement does apply to her. My second son was born in Australia. When I registered his birth with the U.S. Consulate, I had to prove that I had had a certain number of years as a resident in the U.S. (I provided my college transcripts), even though I had been born in the U.S. Since Puzzler’s wife did not reside in the U.S. after she was two (thus not meeting the residency requirements), her children won’t be able to apply for citizenship. Their embassy was correct.
Yep, I’m wrong. News to me, and a real surprise. Sorry, Puzzler.
This link describes how to apply for citizenship documentation of U.S. Citizens Born Abroad (who are, by the way, considered to be “Natural-born citizens”).
Check your e-mail, I sent you some information. Hope it can be done!
Got it. Thanks!
You’re right, they are allowed to become non-commissioned officers. I had it mixed up in my head from the fact that an American national will LOSE their American citizenship if they serve as a com or noncom officer in ANOTHER country’s military. :smack:
Thanx for the correction.
Can you elaborate, please? Perhaps a cite to the relevant rule?
TIA!