Bingo. Far from forgiving her, I want to use her, especially if her story includes the evil things she witnessed ISIS fanatics doing.
No, it is not accurate.
Firstly, it is a bit difficult to give up your American citizenship at present. It’s not that easy to get rid of.
Secondly, the rules change over time, and what would have worked 50 years ago will be different from what works now, and what will work in the future.
And mostly, the path to loosing citizenship is by being a commissioned officer in the armed forces of another country. Just joining up as a soldier isn’t enough.
It might be about what she thinks is best for her son.
I honestly don’t know if she’s a citizen or not, but I am pretty damn sure that’s a matter for the courts to determine, and she’s entitled to that.
Thank you. That is very helpful. Some follow up questions: Assuming “granted admission” is a term of art, would it be correct to say that someone who has been granted “advance parole” has been “admitted” without leaving the country? (I read the link for “advance parole” to imply that you want to leave the country while your application is pending). Tied to these facts: Assuming that the Mother is here under a diplomatic visa and applies for residency, wouldn’t she have to leave the country and return to have been “granted admission” (or granted advance parole) pending her application?
Another question (which doesn’t really matter since the woman was obviously granted residency), flipping through the green card eligibility categories at the link, I assume she applies as a “Section 13 (Diplomat) unable to return home”? Does that assume that she no longer had diplomatic status at the time of the application?
Sure. What applicable laws do you have in mind?
Reentry on Advance Parole is a super-technical area. (And yes, “admission” is a term of art.) It’s supposed to leave you in whatever status you were in before you left, but the details have varied a LOT over the years and the case law is wild. Maybe one of the lawyers here can poke around and see what the state of affairs was there and then. But I suspect nobody on this board can make a solid determination of the situation without seeing all the documents related to the diplomatic status/visa, the parents’ green card applications, etc. I have not seen those posted anywhere and don’t even know whether anyone has all of them easily available. I suspect Hoda’s lawyer is going to be doing some FOIA requests.
I honestly have no idea. We don’t see a lot of diplomats in that situation in Chicago. I have only ever dealt with issues involving diplomatic visas once or twice in 20 years, and in that situation it’s usually a lower-level diplomat who wants to quit and take another job or marry a U.S. citizen or something. One has to renounce the protections of diplomatic status first. There’s even a form for that.) I suspect if I had worked in NY or D.C. I would have run into the issue more often.
I am kind of curious about the reasons why her father left diplomatic service. Has anyone seen anything about that?
P.S. Here are the [instructions](file:///C:/Users/Eve/AppData/Local/Packages/Microsoft.MicrosoftEdge_8wekyb3d8bbwe/TempState/Downloads/i-131instr%20(1).pdf) for the current Advance Parole application form, for example (.pdf). (The form and instructions are kind of confusing because the same form is used to apply for several different types of travel documents.)
In posts #15 & 29, it was shown that to lose citizenship, "… it is not enough to appear to commit the act–even voluntarily–to lose U.S. nationality; the person must also commit the act in order to relinquish the nationality. "
How is that determined, exactly? Is the only way to “show specific intent to relinquish citizenship” is to type up a notarized resignation letter, in triplicate, and mail it to the State Department? Or can some court infer from other actions, like someone burning their own passport?
But was she actually a member of the armed forces of another “country”. Does ISIS have female military members? I suppose it’s possible. After all Iran has used women in combat and the Taliban supposedly had a female doctor they accepted as an officer. However, given ISIS’s stance on female occupations and behaviors, I doubt she was considered a “soldier” of their forces. If she was just the wife of two ISIS’s soldiers as stupid as that decision was, I don’t think it constitutes treason.
She joined an organization that we are fighting, in every sense of the word. That do not have their own ‘country’ seems like nitpicking. We were fighting them when she left to join them and she knew that, and we are still fighting them now.
And I think marrying two of them constitutes ‘aid and comfort’.
But was she preparing to a be a female suicide bomber? And marrying two of them constitutes marrying two of them, not necessarily ‘aid and comfort’ as many divorced people will gladly attest. It’s also arguable that she may not have had much choice in marrying two of them.
Then her running off to join them was a really dumb move.
Right. Nobody forced her to travel to Syria.
Fair point. And she is now indicating that she recognizes this. So…do we award the death penalty for past stupidity?
’
What death penalty?
The one that can come from a conviction for treason. There are at least two posters ITT who have called for her execution. I’m still wondering if that’s really what we’re putting on the table here.
I’m wondering if what is really being put on the table here is the idea of holding someone guilty for the crimes of their spouse. We don’t put mafia wives in prison for the crimes of their husband unless we can prove the wives participated in the crimes. Saying “Fuck America”, burning a flag, etc., are not felonies. Marrying twice in a situation where a woman’s survival is dependent on her relationship with a male protector is not a crime either. Destroying a passport may be a minor crime because it is a legal document, but certainly not worthy of execution or losing citizenship. This woman did something incredibly stupid by going Syria abet she made this decision at an age when the United States government doesn’t consider her old enough to legally purchase alcohol. I wonder sometimes if she was a bit lighter, had blonde hair, and exposed her bust line would Trump’s opinion been more compassionate.
She was old enough to make her own decisions. She was old enough to vote. She was old enough to enter into contracts. She was old enough to join the military. We will brook no more insinuations that she was a naive and gullible child and didn’t know what she was doing. What, you think she was do young to do a google search for ‘taliban’?
She chose to join our enemy. An enemy that actively killing her countrymen. An enemy that was beheading journalists and killing villagers. She can live happy and free…but she can do it somewhere else.
Perhaps. But the government damn well better follow the letter of the law when stripping people of their rights. Short of delousing your child, there is no better time to nitpick.
It seems to me that the government can’t both argue that she’s not a citizen and she committed treason. Nor can they simultaneously say it was wrong to destroy a passport if they claim it wasn’t a valid one. I realize the government has not done so yet, but some are arguing this here.