This is Bullshit
- Thread starter Marine03
- Start date
Yeah, I could agree with that assessment.
Most definitely if the military member was already married, relocated his family overseas, and then has a child, that's absolute bullshit. If a Joe goes over, gets drunk, impregnates a hooker, then falls in love and wants to marry, I still say he should have the right by way of his military service.
Most definitely if the military member was already married, relocated his family overseas, and then has a child, that's absolute bullshit. If a Joe goes over, gets drunk, impregnates a hooker, then falls in love and wants to marry, I still say he should have the right by way of his military service.
This needs to be looked at closely and clarified. If Joe marries Susie in Lincoln, Nebraska joins the service and is stationed in Germany and they have a child while in Germany how could the child of a US service member not be a US citizen? Is that what they are saying?
Statement Regarding a Policy Update Defining “Residence” in Statutory Provisions Related to Citizenship
Today, Acting USCIS Director Ken Cuccinelli issued the following statement regarding a policy update Defining “Residence” in Statutory Provisions Related to Citizenship.
“This policy update does not affect who is born a U.S. citizen, period. This only affects children who were born outside the United States and were not U.S. citizens. This does NOT impact birthright citizenship. This policy update does not deny citizenship to the children of US government employees or members of the military born abroad. This policy aligns USCIS’ process with the Department of State’s procedure, that’s it.”
simply more faux outrage from the left. poor @Marine03 . . .
Last edited:
Statement Regarding a Policy Update Defining “Residence” in Statutory Provisions Related to Citizenship
Today, Acting USCIS Director Ken Cuccinelli issued the following statement regarding a policy update Defining “Residence” in Statutory Provisions Related to Citizenship.
“This policy update does not affect who is born a U.S. citizen, period. This only affects children who were born outside the United States and were not U.S. citizens. This does NOT impact birthright citizenship. This policy update does not deny citizenship to the children of US government employees or members of the military born abroad. This policy aligns USCIS’ process with the Department of State’s procedure, that’s it.”
simply more faux outrage from the left. poor @Marine03 . . .
That’s not what the initial article said and it’s not faux outrage or anything to do with politics dumbass. This was a military issue for me which yore ignat ass wouldn’t know shit about. However, in light of your article which I hope is correct it seems as if someone fvcked up somewhere
yes, it was faux outrage by the left. perhaps you, indirectly, because you sucked up the bullshit someone else was feeding you, but think about it . . . you posted this at 6:48 a.m. I debunked it a bit over an hour later by doing a quick google search and posting a link directly to the us citizenship and immigration services website which was updated yesterday.
lesson for you to learn: research the bullshit the left spoon feeds you before reacting. google makes it easy.
and, the proper response from you ITT would be: This one got me. Dumbass me this time. I'll own it.
as usual, your anti-Trump agenda gets you all lathered up for nothing. some liberal tweets out something to become internet famous, and smugs like yourself fall for it every time.
https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/policymanual/updates/20190828-ResidenceForCitizenship.pdf
Here is the official policy as it was written and dispersed on the government website. Page 11 to me looks like it says they have to apply for citizenship
Here is the official policy as it was written and dispersed on the government website. Page 11 to me looks like it says they have to apply for citizenship
appears me and Fan had the same answer simultaneously. marine take note. you could learn from us, if only you would be patient, learn to read, listen to those much wiser than you, and digest the information. hell, we're giving you a free education, if you would be willing to take advantage of it.
E. Children of U.S. Government Employees and Members of the Armed Forces Employed or Stationed Abroad
Effective October 29, 2019, children residing abroad with their U.S. citizen parents who are U.S. government employees or members of the U.S. armed forces stationed abroad are not considered to be residing in the United Statesfor acquisition of citizenship. Similarly, leave taken in the United States while stationed abroad is not considered residing in the United States even if the person is staying in property he or she owns.
Therefore, U.S. citizen parents who are residing outside the United States with children who are not U.S. citizens should apply for U.S. citizenship on behalf of their children under INA 3228, and must complete the process before the child’s 18th birthday.9 The child of a member of the U.S. armed forces accompanying his or her parent abroad on official orders may be eligible to complete all aspects of the naturalization proceedings abroad. This includes interviews, filings, oaths, ceremonies, or other proceedings relating to naturalization.10
Applications filed on or after October 29, 2019 are subject to this policy. The policy in place before October 29, 2019 applies to applications filed before that date. Children who have already been recognized through the issuance of a Certificate of Citizenship as having acquired U.S. citizenship under INA 320 are not affected by this policy change.
Children born outside the United States who did not acquire U.S. citizenship at birth have two methods by which they could become U.S. citizens. The first method permits children to automatically become U.S. citizens under INA 320. Among other eligibility criteria, the statute requires the child to be “residing in the United States in the legal and physical custody of the citizen parent pursuant to a lawful admission for permanent residence.”11
The second method is for the U.S. citizen parent of a child “who has not acquired citizenship automatically under section 320” to apply for U.S. citizenship on the child’s behalf under INA 322. To be eligible for citizenship under INA 322, the statute requires the child to be “residing outside of the United States in the legal and physical custody of the applicant (or, if the citizen parent is deceased, an individual who does not object to the application).”12
USCIS policy previously provided that children of U.S. government employees and members of the U.S. armed forces who were employed or stationed outside of the United States should be considered to be both “residing in the United States” for purposes of INA 320 and “residing outside of the United States” for purposes of INA 322.13 Their parents were permitted to file an Application for Certificate of Citizenship (Form N-600) on their behalf and obtain a Certificate of Citizenship showing that they had acquired citizenship automatically, or their parents were permitted to file an Application for Citizenship and Issuance of Certificate Under Section 322 (Form N-600K) in order to apply for naturalization on the child’s behalf.
USCIS previously arrived at the interpretation that children of members of the U.S. armed forces could be considered as “residing in the United States” when stationed abroad by comparison to naturalization under INA 316.
For purposes of naturalization under INA 316, eligibility requirements include continuous residence in the United States for at least 5 years after being lawfully admitted for permanent residence.14 An absence from the United States for a continuous period of 1 year of more during the period for which continuous residence is required, breaks the continuity of such residence, except in certain cases when the absence is related to qualifying employment, including an absence by a U.S. government employee who establishes that he or she is absent from the United States on behalf of the U.S. government.15 The spouse and dependent unmarried sons and daughters of such an employee are also entitled to this exception excusing the absence from the United States during which they are residing outside of the United States as dependent members of the U.S. government employee’s household.
Effective October 29, 2019, children residing abroad with their U.S. citizen parents who are U.S. government employees or members of the U.S. armed forces stationed abroad are not considered to be residing in the United Statesfor acquisition of citizenship. Similarly, leave taken in the United States while stationed abroad is not considered residing in the United States even if the person is staying in property he or she owns.
Therefore, U.S. citizen parents who are residing outside the United States with children who are not U.S. citizens should apply for U.S. citizenship on behalf of their children under INA 3228, and must complete the process before the child’s 18th birthday.9 The child of a member of the U.S. armed forces accompanying his or her parent abroad on official orders may be eligible to complete all aspects of the naturalization proceedings abroad. This includes interviews, filings, oaths, ceremonies, or other proceedings relating to naturalization.10
Applications filed on or after October 29, 2019 are subject to this policy. The policy in place before October 29, 2019 applies to applications filed before that date. Children who have already been recognized through the issuance of a Certificate of Citizenship as having acquired U.S. citizenship under INA 320 are not affected by this policy change.
Children born outside the United States who did not acquire U.S. citizenship at birth have two methods by which they could become U.S. citizens. The first method permits children to automatically become U.S. citizens under INA 320. Among other eligibility criteria, the statute requires the child to be “residing in the United States in the legal and physical custody of the citizen parent pursuant to a lawful admission for permanent residence.”11
The second method is for the U.S. citizen parent of a child “who has not acquired citizenship automatically under section 320” to apply for U.S. citizenship on the child’s behalf under INA 322. To be eligible for citizenship under INA 322, the statute requires the child to be “residing outside of the United States in the legal and physical custody of the applicant (or, if the citizen parent is deceased, an individual who does not object to the application).”12
USCIS policy previously provided that children of U.S. government employees and members of the U.S. armed forces who were employed or stationed outside of the United States should be considered to be both “residing in the United States” for purposes of INA 320 and “residing outside of the United States” for purposes of INA 322.13 Their parents were permitted to file an Application for Certificate of Citizenship (Form N-600) on their behalf and obtain a Certificate of Citizenship showing that they had acquired citizenship automatically, or their parents were permitted to file an Application for Citizenship and Issuance of Certificate Under Section 322 (Form N-600K) in order to apply for naturalization on the child’s behalf.
USCIS previously arrived at the interpretation that children of members of the U.S. armed forces could be considered as “residing in the United States” when stationed abroad by comparison to naturalization under INA 316.
For purposes of naturalization under INA 316, eligibility requirements include continuous residence in the United States for at least 5 years after being lawfully admitted for permanent residence.14 An absence from the United States for a continuous period of 1 year of more during the period for which continuous residence is required, breaks the continuity of such residence, except in certain cases when the absence is related to qualifying employment, including an absence by a U.S. government employee who establishes that he or she is absent from the United States on behalf of the U.S. government.15 The spouse and dependent unmarried sons and daughters of such an employee are also entitled to this exception excusing the absence from the United States during which they are residing outside of the United States as dependent members of the U.S. government employee’s household.
But apparently someone within the agency confirmed the original "wrong" (or right, I guess we will eventually see) news.
I'd say this is just another example of a totally incompetent administration...surely to God, I hope, the original news was wrong...but you would probably call that opinion left-wing faux outrage.
You could certainly see how it can get misconstrued the way it’s written. Typical Government BS
similarities in posting style
similarities in posting style
Two peas in the same dumb pod
sorry to step on your leftward toes, crybaby.
yore bold font indicates "residing", not "born".
from yore passage: Children born outside the United States who did not acquire U.S. citizenship at birth have two methods by which they could become U.S. citizens. The first method permits children to automatically become U.S. citizens under INA 320.
yore welcome.
INA 320 states that must take an oath on arrival and they “may” be granted automatic citizenship, that’s the loophole word I don’t like.
The new rules apply to children who were not born as citizens — such as those who were born to non-citizens and later adopted by U.S. citizens serving abroad, or in cases where parents who were not citizens at the time of the child’s birth but were later naturalized.
In such cases, the agency will not automatically grant the residency status needed for citizenship to those children. Instead, those parents will have to apply for their children’s citizenship and prove that they meet the legal requirements. Children of U.S. citizens who do not meet technical residency requirements would also be affected.
“Nonetheless, because the wording of the changes were not easy to grasp, the new guidance, which came in different stages through the day and had to be clarified by the agency, caused widespread confusion and criticism as word of the change spread through social media.”
Got this from the Military Times who initially posted on their website what was originally thought by everyone
In such cases, the agency will not automatically grant the residency status needed for citizenship to those children. Instead, those parents will have to apply for their children’s citizenship and prove that they meet the legal requirements. Children of U.S. citizens who do not meet technical residency requirements would also be affected.
“Nonetheless, because the wording of the changes were not easy to grasp, the new guidance, which came in different stages through the day and had to be clarified by the agency, caused widespread confusion and criticism as word of the change spread through social media.”
Got this from the Military Times who initially posted on their website what was originally thought by everyone
it's really okay to bow out and/or admit you haven't a clue what yore talking about and that yore faux outrage got the best of you before pulling yore head out of yore ass. from INA 320 (it's plain language and not easily misconstrued for those with an IQ greater than the celsius boiling point of water):
§1431. Children born outside the United States and residing permanently in the United States; conditions under which citizenship automatically acquired; determinations of name and birth date
(a) In general
A child born outside of the United States automatically becomes a citizen of the United States when all of the following conditions have been fulfilled:
(1) At least one parent of the child is a citizen of the United States, whether by birth or naturalization.
(2) The child is under the age of eighteen years.
(3) The child is residing in the United States in the legal and physical custody of the citizen parent pursuant to a lawful admission for permanent residence.
hell, i even searched the word "may" in that document and it doesn't exist.
it's really not that difficult . . .
This^^^^
Also from the passage:
Not quite sure how you, or the guy you linked above, missed those sections.
just another liberal thing for soft guys to cry about. meanwhile, for every soldier kid born abroad, there's about 1000 Aztec Indian type kids crossing the border, and these folks couldn't care less.
I am sure there has never been a mistake by another administration, ever! Cmon man.
By who, a circus freak? Which one of the circus freaks aka Dems running? Do they even have one normal person who roots for America running? Joe Biden is going to be run out shortly.
love this. goes from sitting on the edge of his seat just hoping he'll get to display more faux outrage because "orange man bad" syndrome to "it doesn't matter" after reading plain text that even retarded ambulance chasers can understand disproving the OP.
you faggit libs should be thanking us for keeping your blood pressure down via ridding you of your faux outrage.
That's not a simple mistake. That is some BAD imaging. It's so bad, even if I thought it was the right answer I would triple check before I answered, because I would know this looks BAD.
Incompetence because competent folks don't want to work in this administration.
The military times posted it as well, every news media out there did. This is poorly written at best. When everyone had it wrong it’s a problem
Similar threads
