In this thread, it was pointed out the Arnold Schwarzenegger retains his Austrian citizenship. Yet, when he became an American citizen, he took an oath that begins, “I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen…” How is this not perjury, notwithstanding the fact that dual citizenship is allowed? The language is clear: “absolutely and entirely”…“abjure all allegiance and fidelity”. Also note the use of the past tense in describing the former citizenship. It doesn’t say “of which I am currently a citizen.”
When my great-grandparents became U.S. citizens, they took the same oath, but they also had to sign a statement specifically renouncing allegiance to the head of state of their native country. There was even a little space in which the INS stamped “King Victor Emmanuel II of Italy”. Is this no longer required, and if so, why not?
This has been discussed in the linked thread, but I believe the topic deserves a thread of its own.
The naturalized citizen swears no allegiance to foreign powers; that doesn’t mean the foreign power has to agree. I assume that, if Governor Schwarzenegger were asked, he’d say, “As far as I’m concerned, I am an American citizen.” Austria may not agree with him, but that doesn’t make his oath false.
I think the “Austrian citizen” part is based on whether or not the Austrian government allows dual citizenship.
IANAL, but I don’t believe the US government allows that. Arnie is an American citizen only, in the eyes of the feds. The Austrians may regard him as holding dual citizenship, but if he renounced citizenship in that country, what they do doesn’t affect him.
FWIW, my children are more or less in the same situation. They are both adopted from South Korea, and the South Korean government regards them as holding dual citizenship. The US government, I believe, does not recognize this. As far as the US is concerned, both of them are naturalized citizens of the US. It would be only if they ran for president of South Korea after they turned 21 or voted in the South Korean elections or something that they would be in trouble as far as the US was concerned.
Of course, both are minors, and were minors when they were naturalized, so legally and morally they are not responsible. I think once they hit 21, they could, in theory, go be South Koreans instead of Americans.
But I am rather hoping the amendment goes thru so that either of my kids can run for President.
Although I’ve checked, and in the case of my daughter, it may not matter. There is no requirement to be a native-born citizen in order to become Supreme Dictator of the Universe.
Becoming South Korean president might cause them trouble, but the US wouldn’t care if they voted in South Korean elections. Please read the page I linked to in the other thread.
WRT the OP, he is only a perjurer if he still remains loyal to Austria. Holding citizenship of a country does not necessary mean one is loyal to that country.
As we all know Kevin Bacon is within six degrees of separation of anyone who ever appeared in any movie and was in the movie “The River Wild” where the word “Whitewater” was uttered, who do you think wants investigate this possible perjury charge?
It’s a little more nebulous than that (there have been several discussions on this topic here over the years). The USA discourages but does not legally forbid dual citizenship. They might not recognize the other citizenship in the way some other governments might. But AFAIK you cannot get arrested for holding another passport in conjunction with a US passport. And just because Austria still “claims” Arnie doesn’t make him a perjurer.
Actually, according to this site, Schwarzenegger specifically requested that he be permitted to retain his Austrian citizenship, and the governor of his home province helped him do so. The site also states that Austria “in principle does not allow dual nationality,” so strings evidently had to be pulled.
I wonder why he wanted to keep his Austrian citizenship. Tax or business reasons, possibly?
What about people who hold dual citizenship simply because they were born in another country? There are a couple of parliamentarians here in Ireland who just happened to be born in other countries, but both their parents were Irish and they moved back to Ireland at a very young age. They speak with Irish accents and you’d never know they weren’t born here unless you were told. Their foreign citizenship isn’t really anything more than a matter of them having a birth certificate from, and holding a(n additional) passport of, another country. Is this really a conflict of interest? If so, why?
For an average citizen, it doesn’t really matter. As a politician (and one who may aspire to the presidency) I think claiming equal loyalty to two countries would make unbiased decisions regarding that second country nearly impossible.
Well that doesn’t seem to be the case for the two politicians I cited. Perhaps because the fact that they hold the other country’s passport doesn’t mean they have equal (or indeed any) loyalty to it.
Vienna’s going to get all bothered now because Arnie signed an execution order? You’d think if they didn’t revoke his citizenship after “Jingle All The Way” they’d pretty much let anything go.
Why do you suppose the politicians you refer to have not renounced their foreign citizenship? Just to avoid customs hassles at the airport?
Let us focus on the Governator if we may. It’s an open secret that he wants to run for President and has groups agitating for a Constitutional amendment to allow him to do so as a non-natural-born citizen. One would expect the argument to be made that the law should be changed because naturalized citizens are just as loyal as natural-born citizens, and we shouldn’t discriminate, blah blah blah. S. retaining his Austrian citizenship in clear violation of the Oath of Allegiance is not only treading on thin ice legally, it makes it impossible for him to seriously claim that he is loyal only to the United States. Can you imagine…can you imagine if the Democrats were pushing a candidate with dual citizenship? Such a candidate would be grateful to be let out of the country alive after the Republicans got done with him.
Holding citizenship to a country (at the very least) implies allegiance and loyalty to that country.
While the Irish Parliamentarians you mention, who moved to Ireland at young ages, may actually feel no ties to the countries they were born in, you may not be aware of pressures that they have had to work through and/or the subject may have just not come up yet.
Austria’s pressure on Schwarzenegger over his views on the death penalty, whether he gives in to it or not, is a good example of the potential for bias and the conflict of interest I was thinking of.
It already has. The duly enacted law says that naturalized citizens can’t be President. Being a naturalized citizen is considered to present an inherent conflict of interest. There is no need to revisit the issue every election. In Schwarzenegger’s case, there is the additional question of whether he committed perjury when he took the Oath of Allegiance. Suppose, in some fantasy world, he gets convicted of perjury. That alone doesn’t disqualify him, but voters might consider it grounds for not voting for him.
Personally, I think it would be OK for a naturalized citizen who has lived in this country more or less continuously from the age of, say, five, and who is a citizen of no other country, to be President. But even that would require the law to be changed.
Besides, even if you don’t vote for him, he’s still your President. I certainly don’t feel I have “hired” George W. Bush in any sense, but I still recognize him as legitimate, because he was elected more or less fairly and meets the Constitutional requirements.
Quite possibly. That’s the only reason I won’t renounce mine.
I don’t see what’s clear about it. The Oath requires him to renounce “allegiance or fidelity” to any other country. It doesn’t say that he has to renounce citizenship of any other country. As much as you would like that to be the same thing, it isn’t.
I hold citizenship to a country I have no allegiance or loyalty to. As do a number of people I know. Obtaining, or retaining, citizenship can just as easily be a practical decision rather than an emotional one.
