4 ms·

As far as I can tell, being born here is the only reason that I'm considered a citizen. My parents were also considered citizens for the same reason. But if we

by jfengel 11mo ago

As far as I can tell, being born here is the only reason that I'm considered a citizen. My parents were also considered citizens for the same reason. But if we go back a few generations, I don't think the paperwork exists to prove that their great-grandparents were citizens. There might be a copy in some Ellis Island archive, but I'd be hard pressed to locate it. So... lacking that documentation, does the recursion unwind? Being descended of not-provably-naturalized-citizens, am I at risk of deportation?

Ancapistani 11mo ago
I have two thoughts about this. First - there's no point in worrying about something before it's clear what will happen. Personally, I find it extremely unlikely that any decision will be so broadly defined as to be applicable to more than a handful of people. Second - I propose that it doesn't matter. I lean toward the Trump administration's positions on probably 2/3 of the issues commonly discussed today, and even from that position I would be incredibly outraged if mass denaturalization were to come to pass. The country would no longer be the America I love at that point, and I would feel very little if any affinity for it. If what you fear comes to pass, I wouldn't see it as something happening to you - I would see it as a clear signal to emigrate as soon as possible, and at pretty much all costs.
- muwtyhg 11mo ago
  > First - there's no point in worrying about something before it's clear what will happen You don't think it's important to prepare for things that have a non-zero likelihood of occurring? This case has already worked its way to the Supreme Court, it's obvious something is happening with it. > Second - I propose that it doesn't matter. I lean toward the Trump administration's positions on probably 2/3 of the issues commonly discussed today Is the anti-immigrant rhetoric of this admin one of the things you do or not lean towards?
  - Ancapistani 11mo ago
    > You don't think it's important to prepare for things that have a non-zero likelihood of occurring? Of course that's not what I meant. Preparation is not the same as worry. Worry solves nothing; what's needed is a cycle of observation, analysis, preparation, and action. > Is the anti-immigrant rhetoric of this admin one of the things you do or not lean towards? Absolutely. (ETA for clarity: meaning I absolutely disagree with their statements that incite division and feed hate) I truly try to limit my sharing of my own views on HN, because that's not in the spirit of the community and not why I come here. If you're honestly interested in how I see it, I can copy over a post I just made on a right-wing forum on this topic. I assure you, I have no hate in my heart for anyone. What I feel is driven by empathy, what I say is informed by empathy, and what I do is -- to the best of my ability -- a result of careful rational thought.
    - muwtyhg 11mo ago
      > Preparation is not the same as worry. Worry solves nothing Would you prepare for something you did not have any worries about? I assume any preparation would be in response to a worry/fear/uncertainty about a situation. You study for a test because you are worried you will not know the answers. Preparation and worry seem intrinsically linked. Worry is the onus through which preparation becomes necessary. > I truly try to limit my sharing of my own views on HN Is that true? You freely gave your opinions on this issue and the admin in your previous comment, and you seem to talk about your opinions on these things elsewhere on HN. I was just trying to understand what parts of this admin you lean towards, and if this is one of those cases. If you copy a post from that other forum here, I would read and likely respond to it if it was relevant to my earlier question. > I assure you, I have no hate in my heart for anyone. What I feel is driven by empathy, what I say is informed by empathy, and what I do is -- to the best of my ability -- a result of careful rational thought. I have a hard time squaring this with "leaning towards agreeing with 2/3rds of the admin's decisions." Trump is highly vindictive and has made that a cornerstone of this "revenge tour" presidency. But that is probably a conversation for another, more politically-inclined forum.
      - Ancapistani 11mo ago
commandlinefan 11mo ago
> being born here is the only reason that I'm considered a citizen What was the test for citizenship before the 14th amendment?
- hrunt 11mo ago
  > What was the test for citizenship before the 14th amendment? Basically, the same. Inglis v. Trustees of Sailor's Snug Harbor (1830) established: The rule commonly laid down in the books is, that every person who is born within the ligeance of a sovereign is a subject; and, e converso, that every person born without such allegiance is an alien. . . . Two things usually concur to create citizenship; first, birth locally within the dominions of the sovereign; and secondly, birth within the protection and obedience, or in other words, within the ligeance of the sovereign. That is, the party must be born within a place where the sovereign is at the time in full possession and exercise of his power, and the party must also at his birth derive protection from, and consequently owe obedience or allegiance to the sovereign, as such, de facto.[0] It excluded slaves and it excluded Native Americans. Native American US citizenship was established in 1924 by statute.[1] [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizenship_Clause#cite_ref-4 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizenship_Clause#cite_ref-4 [1] https://www.bia.gov/faqs/are-american-indians-and-alaska-natives-citizens-united-states https://www.bia.gov/faqs/are-american-indians-and-alaska-nat...
tastyface 11mo ago
That depends. How light is your skin color?

by jfengel 11mo ago

Ancapistani 11mo ago

I have two thoughts about this. First - there's no point in worrying about something before it's clear what will happen. Personally, I find it extremely unlikely that any decision will be so broadly defined as to be applicable to more than a handful of people. Second - I propose that it doesn't matter. I lean toward the Trump administration's positions on probably 2/3 of the issues commonly discussed today, and even from that position I would be incredibly outraged if mass denaturalization were to come to pass. The country would no longer be the America I love at that point, and I would feel very little if any affinity for it. If what you fear comes to pass, I wouldn't see it as something happening to you - I would see it as a clear signal to emigrate as soon as possible, and at pretty much all costs.

muwtyhg 11mo ago
> First - there's no point in worrying about something before it's clear what will happen You don't think it's important to prepare for things that have a non-zero likelihood of occurring? This case has already worked its way to the Supreme Court, it's obvious something is happening with it. > Second - I propose that it doesn't matter. I lean toward the Trump administration's positions on probably 2/3 of the issues commonly discussed today Is the anti-immigrant rhetoric of this admin one of the things you do or not lean towards?
- Ancapistani 11mo ago
  > You don't think it's important to prepare for things that have a non-zero likelihood of occurring? Of course that's not what I meant. Preparation is not the same as worry. Worry solves nothing; what's needed is a cycle of observation, analysis, preparation, and action. > Is the anti-immigrant rhetoric of this admin one of the things you do or not lean towards? Absolutely. (ETA for clarity: meaning I absolutely disagree with their statements that incite division and feed hate) I truly try to limit my sharing of my own views on HN, because that's not in the spirit of the community and not why I come here. If you're honestly interested in how I see it, I can copy over a post I just made on a right-wing forum on this topic. I assure you, I have no hate in my heart for anyone. What I feel is driven by empathy, what I say is informed by empathy, and what I do is -- to the best of my ability -- a result of careful rational thought.
  - muwtyhg 11mo ago
    > Preparation is not the same as worry. Worry solves nothing Would you prepare for something you did not have any worries about? I assume any preparation would be in response to a worry/fear/uncertainty about a situation. You study for a test because you are worried you will not know the answers. Preparation and worry seem intrinsically linked. Worry is the onus through which preparation becomes necessary. > I truly try to limit my sharing of my own views on HN Is that true? You freely gave your opinions on this issue and the admin in your previous comment, and you seem to talk about your opinions on these things elsewhere on HN. I was just trying to understand what parts of this admin you lean towards, and if this is one of those cases. If you copy a post from that other forum here, I would read and likely respond to it if it was relevant to my earlier question. > I assure you, I have no hate in my heart for anyone. What I feel is driven by empathy, what I say is informed by empathy, and what I do is -- to the best of my ability -- a result of careful rational thought. I have a hard time squaring this with "leaning towards agreeing with 2/3rds of the admin's decisions." Trump is highly vindictive and has made that a cornerstone of this "revenge tour" presidency. But that is probably a conversation for another, more politically-inclined forum.
    - Ancapistani 11mo ago

commandlinefan 11mo ago

> being born here is the only reason that I'm considered a citizen What was the test for citizenship before the 14th amendment?

hrunt 11mo ago
> What was the test for citizenship before the 14th amendment? Basically, the same. Inglis v. Trustees of Sailor's Snug Harbor (1830) established: The rule commonly laid down in the books is, that every person who is born within the ligeance of a sovereign is a subject; and, e converso, that every person born without such allegiance is an alien. . . . Two things usually concur to create citizenship; first, birth locally within the dominions of the sovereign; and secondly, birth within the protection and obedience, or in other words, within the ligeance of the sovereign. That is, the party must be born within a place where the sovereign is at the time in full possession and exercise of his power, and the party must also at his birth derive protection from, and consequently owe obedience or allegiance to the sovereign, as such, de facto.[0] It excluded slaves and it excluded Native Americans. Native American US citizenship was established in 1924 by statute.[1] [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizenship_Clause#cite_ref-4 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizenship_Clause#cite_ref-4 [1] https://www.bia.gov/faqs/are-american-indians-and-alaska-natives-citizens-united-states https://www.bia.gov/faqs/are-american-indians-and-alaska-nat...

tastyface 11mo ago

That depends. How light is your skin color?