Isis member wants “a second chance”

SixOfWands

Thu, Feb 21 2019, 12:21 pm

doctorima wrote:

Update: Dept. of State says she's actually not a US citizen and has no legal right to enter the US, and will not be allowed to do so - https://abcnews.go.com/US/isis.....93487

Well, that's the real issue, isn't it.

She was born in the US, unquestionably. The issue is whether it was while her father was still a foreign diplomat (in which case she would NOT be a US citizen), or after (in which case she would be a citizen). She and her family claim that it was after.

I'm always surprised to see conservatives who support following the law to its letter ... until they disagree with it. Then all bets are off.

If she's a US citizen, then she has to be allowed to return to the US. There's simply no basis to disallow it. She can then be arrested and tried for her crimes. And should be. Let her parents raise the baby.

What's interesting is that the US government is calling on European countries to take back 800 ISIS FIGHTERS that the US captured, and put them on trial in their countries.

https://twitter.com/realDonald.....72696

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/w.....72696

Guess we should do the same with one 20-something mother.

SixOfWands

Thu, Feb 21 2019, 12:27 pm

Jeanette wrote:

1. The issue of her citizenship was already adjudicated by the courts when she was issued a US passport. Her father was not serving as a diplomat when she was born. They can't just declare her an uncitizen.

2. The fear in the state department is that she may not have committed crimes that are chargeable under our laws. Even if she's convicted of something she may not serve a very long term. So it seems easier to just refuse her a new passport and let her languish in Syria.

3. It's an interesting case because she's not a very sympathetic protagonist, but on the other hand it sets a precedent that citizenship can be revoked (or even pretend you never had it). Even if today it's only applied to terrorists or terrorist sympathizers, who knows how it could be applied down the road to politically unpopular groups. I'm an American born in Israel to American parents. What would stop an administration from deciding one day that I'm not a citizen?

Again the question isn't whether she "deserves" citizenship but whether our legal system has a process for revoking citizenship and for what cause.

Was it actually adjudicated? My understanding is that no one really asks, so long as you have a US birth certificate, so no one would have known whether or not he was a diplomat when the passport was issued.

And I have to say ... I think that the US does someday have to address how long the children of expats should be considered US citizen. Eg, my friends B&L were born in the US, but made aliyah. Their children were born in Israel, but are considered US citizens as well. Their grandchildren are also US citizens (I think they have to spend a couple of months in the US or something; its how I met some of the grandkids). Now, what happens when the grandchildren have kids. Why should people who haven't lived in the US for generations be US citizen with the right to vote?

Sorry. Thread drift.

Fox

Thu, Feb 21 2019, 12:49 pm

SixOfWands wrote:

I'm always surprised to see conservatives who support following the law to its letter ... until they disagree with it. Then all bets are off.

If she's a US citizen, then she has to be allowed to return to the US. There's simply no basis to disallow it. She can then be arrested and tried for her crimes. And should be. Let her parents raise the baby.

I don't actually see a lot of agreement/disagreement based on party or ideological lines here. People are expressing their feelings that they don't want her back, but most people also realize that the law doesn't necessarily support their feelings and are ultimately okay with that.

National Review

All the rhetoric aside, this will play out in the courts, and Muthana may change her mind about returning if she's facing a lengthy prison sentence.

Jeanette

Thu, Feb 21 2019, 1:15 pm

SixOfWands wrote:

According to the family's lawyer, her family showed proof that her father was no longer serving as a diplomat when she was born. I guess you can be skeptical of these claims without further evidence.

Quote:

When Muthana first received her US passport when she was a child, her father was asked to produce proof that he had been discharged from his diplomatic post. Authorities reviewed her case, says her family lawyer, and handed her not just her first passport but also her second.

Your other questions are interesting, as well as the question of what to do with citizens who become enemy combatants. But these are questions that need to be decided by our legal system. Granting or revoking citizenship is not a power given to the president. And noting this fact shouldn't be conflated with supporting or condoning a member of ISIS.

Last edited by Jeanette on Thu, Feb 21 2019, 1:31 pm; edited 1 time in total

anon for this

Thu, Feb 21 2019, 11:24 pm

FranticFrummie wrote:

This is what happens when you allow "anchor babies".

Eventually they come back and bite you in the rear end.

I wonder if the Native Americans felt that way about Virginia Dare.

In any case, Hoda Muthana would be considered an "anchor baby" if her parents used her birth as a pretext to gain American citizenship. I haven't been able to verify that is the case.

I agree with previous posters that, rather than having her citizenship revoked, she be brought back to the US to face charges.

If her citizenship is revoked, then her 18-month-old son may not be a citizen either.

ally

Fri, Feb 22 2019, 8:46 am

SixOfWands wrote:

I’m pretty sure citizenship by descent ends at grandchildren. And the sponsor (parent or grandparent) has to provide proof that they lived in the states for two? Years after the age of 16 or 18 (I don’t remember exact details but this is the gist).

2cents

Fri, Feb 22 2019, 10:14 am

Fox wrote:

Well, the plot thickens: According to Politico, it seems that her citizenship was revoked by the Obama administration because the proper notification hadn't been given in 1994 about her father's change in status.

Those darned conservatives!

Came hear to see if this would change minds (because it was a decision made by the obama administration) or if people would just stop talking about it once it can't be used to further their accusations on trump.

SixOfWands

Fri, Feb 22 2019, 10:26 am

2cents wrote:

The thread was started by Cheiny, who, just let's say, isn't particularly well-known for her making accusations against Trump.

But I suppose you could address her directly.

Hey, Cheiny! If it was the Obama administration that revoked her citizenship, are you now OK with everything?

anon for this

Fri, Feb 22 2019, 10:33 am

2cents wrote:

Muthana's attorneys say that the letter from the Obama administration was based on the incorrect assumption that her father was still a diplomat when she was born, which wasn't the case. The article I saw didn't address if or how Muthana's family responded to this letter.

I can't speak for other posters, but I would be concerned if any president unilaterally decided to revoke a person's citizenship, as this is in the jurisdiction of the courts.

SixOfWands

Fri, Feb 22 2019, 10:36 am

Fox wrote:

Can you point to the article? I did a search for Muthana on Politico, and it doesn't come up for me.

I don't know how failing to provide notice of her father's change in status could affect her, given that even undocumented aliens -- who don't tell the government much of anything -- have kids who are citizens. And given that her parents claim to be able to demonstrate that they had been granted permanent resident status by time of her birth.

We'll see how it all plays out.

Fox

Fri, Feb 22 2019, 10:41 am

2cents wrote:

Lol! We have to go through several stages before this will disappear:

First will come the stage of, "We need to wait to get all the facts."

Next will come the stage of, "It wasn't 'the Obama administration'; it was just a bureaucratic action."

Then will come the stage of, "Well, it's important that we as a nation discuss the issue of how citizenship is revoked."

And then, mirabile dictu, the story will cease to exist outside of a few special-interest websites.

Jeanette

Fri, Feb 22 2019, 10:46 am

Quote:

Then will come the stage of, "Well, it's important that we as a nation discuss the issue of how citizenship is revoked."

We are already at that stage on imamother at least. But the question in the OP is whether she "deserves a second chance," which really is irrelevant to the legal question of whether or not she's a citizen.