Naturalization

[Jonathan Buhacoff]

Intent

To ensure that all citizens have a firm and reliable foundation for their civic life.

Proposal

Naturalization is the process through which a non-citizen becomes a citizen and gains all the rights and responsibilities of citizenship the same as someone who was natural-born in the country.

By definition all existing references to natural-born citizens in the Constitution and in the law must also be understood to mean naturalized citizens.

Citizenship must be irrevocable.

A residency permit can be revoked only after the immigrant has been convicted of a felony and served the consequence (money penalty and possible prison time). It cannot be revoked for misdemeanors.

A temporary work visa, student visa, or tourist visa can be revoked after the immigrant has been convicted of a felony or misdemeanor and served the consequence (money penalty and possible prison time).

Discussion

In the United States, there is a legal process called “naturalization” which means the process of becoming a citizen of the United States, as opposed to staying as a legal resident but not a citizen.

However, currently when a person is “naturalized”, they are still not considered the same as a “natural-born” citizen. The most prominent example of this is in the Constitution, where it states “No Person except a natural born Citizen… shall be eligible to the Office of President”, and because of that many people would say that an immigrant who was “naturalized” is not eligible to be President because they are not “natural-born”, regardless of the plain and obvious meanings of these terms.

If being “naturalized” means to start considering someone the same as a natural-born citizens, then a naturalized citizen should be eligible to be elected President. But if a naturalized citizens is still not eligible to be elected president, then that citizen really isn’t being treated the same as a natural-born citizen, and the term “naturalization” is meaningless.

The eligibility requirements for voting and holding public office must not distinguish between natural-born citizens and naturalized citizens. The proposed right to equal regulation and right to equal opportunity protect people from discrimination based on their birthplace. This makes it obvious that distinctions between natural-born citizens and naturalized citizens when considering who can be elected President are violations of rights. If we make a distinction between what rights and privileges are available to people, it should be based on their acts and commitments as adults and not based on where they were born or who they were born to. Requiring that a person be a citizen to be elected President is not a violation of rights because it doesn’t discriminate based on a person’s birthplace.

Naturalization is also meaningless if the government is able to revoke it for any reason. Citizenship cannot be revoked from natural-born citizens, and if naturalized citizens are treated the same as natural-born citizens then their citizenship also should not be revokable. Unfortunately, the United States government has revoked citizenship from naturalized people in the past. This practice must end. A person who becomes naturalized accepts all the rights and responsibilities of citizenship so if they commit crimes they must face the consequences the same as a natural-born citizen. If the people want to set up a system by which citizens can be deported, that system must also be applicable to natural-born citizens — and if that seems abhorrent to natural-born citizens, the rule should be that no citizen can be deported, ever, for any reason. However, as a softer alternative, the government may facilitate a citizen (natural-born or naturalized) obtaining a permanent residency in another country and “self-deporting” by choosing to move away and possibly never return. This is also called exile. The reason it’s softer is because the victim of this policy has a choice — stay in prison indefinitely and possibly for life, or self-deport into exile indefinitely and possibly for life. The duration of the prison stay or the exile depends on the circumstances. If the government was being too aggressive about the punishment, possibly because the prosecution was political and not based on justice, a future government might pardon the imprisoned or exiled citizen and allow them to return to normal life. But for any of this to apply to either natural-born citizens or naturalized citizens and not the other is abhorrent.

Citizenship is permanent and irrevocable. A citizen makes a pledge of allegiance and agrees to follow the law, so if a citizen is convicted of a felony or misdemeanor — whether natural-born or naturalized if there is a distinction — the citizen must face the consequences for that, but those consequences cannot include losing the citizenship itself.

If it’s possible for the government to revoke a person’s citizenship, then anyone who has a revokable citizenship doesn’t really have the same rights as people with non-revokable citizenship, because in practice the government can target that person for their legal but undesirable activities — for example dissident or opposition speech or protest — and find some minor violation to use as an excuse to revoke their citizenship and deport them.

[Author]

Posts