Example of what happens when you assume you are a USC

Interesting story!

Let me ask you this . . . my son was born in Texas when when wife and I were permanent residents. (My wife has become a naturalized citizen since, and I have only recently applied to become one.) So, my son, now eighteen, has a US birth certificate and a US passport. Is there any need for us to get a "certificate of citizenship" of any sort on his behalf?

Thanks. And, also, please let me take the opportunity to express my personal gratitude to you for your outstanding contribution to these forums.
 
javacafe said:
Interesting story!

Let me ask you this . . . my son was born in Texas when when wife and I were permanent residents. (My wife has become a naturalized citizen since, and I have only recently applied to become one.) So, my son, now eighteen, has a US birth certificate and a US passport. Is there any need for us to get a "certificate of citizenship" of any sort on his behalf?

Thanks. And, also, please let me take the opportunity to express my personal gratitude to you for your outstanding contribution to these forums.
Click to expand...

Your son is a natural born U.S. citizen and his birth certificate is a primary document establishing his citizenship. He does not need to get any other documents from USCIS. In fact, I believe he would not be able to get a certificate of citizenship from USCIS even if he tried - my understanding is that a certificate of citizenship is meant for those U.S. citizens who do not have a U.S. birth certificate (because they were born abroad and/or became U.S. citizens after birth).
 
javacafe said:
Interesting story!

Let me ask you this . . . my son was born in Texas when when wife and I were permanent residents. (My wife has become a naturalized citizen since, and I have only recently applied to become one.) So, my son, now eighteen, has a US birth certificate and a US passport. Is there any need for us to get a "certificate of citizenship" of any sort on his behalf?

Thanks. And, also, please let me take the opportunity to express my personal gratitude to you for your outstanding contribution to these forums.
Click to expand...

Since your son is a US born citizen, his birth certificate is his proof of citizenship.
In the 95 year old veteran's case, he was born in Canada but thought he automatically was a USC since his parents were. Without any certificate of citizenship, he was no proof of being a USC.
 
It is still surprising how a non-US citizen or LPR can enlist in the US citizen. I guess things were not as stringent back in the day when he could have even more easily attained citizenship than today. I am sure there is awa way for him to do just that now anyway.
 
I have to wonder what kind of isolated life he's been living that he's never had to prove his citizenship for the past 70+ years.
 
Yes, that is what I gathered from reading the story. He was in the US military and the while he, and I guess the military he enlisted in back then, thought he was a US citizen when in fact he has been Canadian all along. Kind begs me to ask what documentation he showed to enlist with (other than the attorney letter that granted him "private" citizenship...LO really L, when it should have been the then INS certificate of citizenship he should have been working toward).
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Isn't it sad that they haven't had any issues collecting his taxes over many years or letting him risk his life at war, but they are giving him so much trouble about citizenship? I am sure immigration laws where quite different at the time he moved to the US, so it is not so unreasonable that he assumed he was a US citizen. Perhaps we need a law that if someone can prove that has been living in the country for let's say ten or fifteen years that this person can naturalize. Just a thought.
 
Apparently he is a US citizen through his American parents, but he's unable to prove it because they were born in the 1800's and their birth records have disappeared or never existed.
 
From reading the news-story it sounds likely to me that the guy is in fact a U.S. citizen by birth, he just can't prove it. According to this table
http://www.uscis.gov/ilink/docView/AFM/HTML/AFM/0-0-0-1/0-0-0-26573/0-0-0-33237.html#0-0-0-967
a child born abroad, prior to 5/24/1934, in wedlock to a couple where at least one parent was a U.S. citizen, derived citizenship at birth provided the citizen parent had resided in the U.S. at some point. The article says that both of the man's parents were U.S. citizens and that the father was in fact born in Iowa. So it looks to me like the subject of the article did in fact acquire U.S. citizenship at birth. The real problem he has now is trying to get any documentation relating to the citizenship of his parents.
 
jayoa said:
Yes, that is what I gathered from reading the story. He was in the US military and the while he, and I guess the military he enlisted in back then, thought he was a US citizen when in fact he has been Canadian all along. Kind begs me to ask what documentation he showed to enlist with (other than the attorney letter that granted him "private" citizenship...LO really L, when it should have been the then INS certificate of citizenship he should have been working toward).
Click to expand...

Back in the early 1900s and up to World War II the military apparently was very lax with checking records and ID. There are many stories of veterans who lied about their age so they could join the military at 16 or 17.
 
Huracan said:
Perhaps we need a law that if someone can prove that has been living in the country for let's say ten or fifteen years that this person can naturalize. Just a thought.
Click to expand...

Make that 50 or 60 years. 10 or 15 years makes it too easy to game the system, and with a 10-15 year time frame the records almost always are available to prove or disprove claims to citizenship.
 
The original story was reported by KOMO and picked up by national media. However, it is very misleading. The paperwork that was given to him was for an application for a certificate of citizenship (N-600), not an application for citizenship as reported in story. To state that he's not a US citizen is misleading. He has a valid claim to US citizenship via his US parents. The issue is that he doesn't have the paperwork to show that he is a US citizen, not that he isn't a US citizen.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Jackolantern said:
Make that 50 or 60 years. 10 or 15 years makes it too easy to game the system, and with a 10-15 year time frame the records almost always are available to prove or disprove claims to citizenship.
Click to expand...

I meant it not just as a fix for this person, but as a general fix to the immigration system, in particular for undocumented immigrants or people with other difficulties proving citizenship. Yes, there would be gaming the system, it would encourage more people to come to the US. I am not claiming it is a perfect solution. I also don't intend to open a flame war, although it might. It's just that the current system is too bureaucratic and expensive. I think this country should be more open and straightforward towards immigration.
 
Bobsmyth said:
The original story was reported by KOMO and picked up by national media. However, it is very misleading. The paperwork that was given to him was for an application for a certificate of citizenship (N-600), not an application for citizenship as reported in story. To state that he's not a US citizen is misleading. He was a valid claim to US citizenship via his US parents. The issue is that he doesn't have the paperwork to show that he is a US citizen, not that he isn't a US citizen.
Click to expand...

Exactly, that is my understanding of the situation as well. It is annoying that even the national news-outlets, which should do some fact-checking and display minimal competency, keep making the same incorrect statements.
E.g. FoxNews has this story titled as "World War II Vet Finds Out He Is Not a U.S. Citizen", http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/03/23/world-war-ii-vet-finds-citizen/?test=latestnews
 
baikal3 said:
Exactly, that is my understanding of the situation as well. It is annoying that even the national news-outlets, which should do some fact-checking and display minimal competency, keep making the same incorrect statements.
E.g. FoxNews has this story titled as "World War II Vet Finds Out He Is Not a U.S. Citizen", http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/03/23/world-war-ii-vet-finds-citizen/?test=latestnews
Click to expand...
Yeah, and the sad thing is once a misleading story is picked up by other media outlets, it spreads like wildfire. All the media care about is reporting a sensationalist story for ratings, not whether they bothered checking their facts first.
 
I personally will not blame the reporters, the thing with these people know nothing about the immigration process or what anything relating to it means. We know all the technicalities because we are "dealers" in immigration issues; we have either gone through it, currently going through it ourselves or for a friend/family. Other than that, we will not know any of these things. These guys have no idea what it entails so as to word it better, and much less doing what reporters do to rev up the story for more audience.
 
jayoa said:
I personally will not blame the reporters, the thing with these people know nothing about the immigration process or what anything relating to it means. We know all the technicalities because we are "dealers" in immigration issues; we have either gone through it, currently going through it ourselves or for a friend/family. Other than that, we will not know any of these things. These guys have no idea what it entails so as to word it better, and much less doing what reporters do to rev up the story for more audience.
Click to expand...

I personally very much DO blame the reporters. It is their job to do the proper fact-checking and when, writing on a subject requiring some specialized knowledge, to consult people with reliable expertise in that subject. That is what the reporters are supposed to do, and it is a basic ethical requirement of their profession. Of course I do not expect a reporter to understand the intricacies of the U.S. immigration and nationality law. But I do expect a reporter, when writing a story about such a topic, to consult some experts who do have such knowledge, to make sure that the reporter's understanding and presentation of the facts is correct.
 
Journalists have a responsibility to get the facts correct. When they don't they lose even more credibility.

Mr. Davidson (the WWII vet) was a USC at birth under section 1993 of the Revised Statutes through his USC father if the story is right about his dad being born in Iowa. The law was later retroactively amended in 1934 to include a claim through the mother. He needs someone checking into the old census records for information on his parents (1880 census for dad's birth information). He can keep checking every 10 years after that for more evidence.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top