Childs US Passport : A query

Can you provide a link?


De-facto it is being used as a national ID card, and not just by government - by various private enterprises. The ultimate evil is EXPERIAN that collects all personal data about every person. Guess what they use for their database indexing? SSN.


Call it whatever you want. It is a federally-issued card that proves one's citizenship and identity. It seems that you assume all national ID cards can only be mandatory, but it's not the case. They don't even have to be called National ID cards - if you remove from the passport card annotation "valid only for land and sea travel ..." and include a holder's signature, there will be no difference between, say, German personalausweis and the US passport card (except for being optional). If some people think that national ID card can be more convenient than state-issued ID/DL card, why not let them have it? It's not like you are forcing it on the rest of population.

Please see INA 274A [this is the statutory source of E-Verify and the form I-9. you can find it on www.uscis.gov on the laws tab....I'm not going to dig for the SSN and passport statutes but you can have fun looking if it really matters to you.]

(c) No Authorization of National Identification Cards.-Nothing in this section shall be construed to authorize, directly or indirectly, the issuance or use of national identification cards or the establishment of a national identification card.
 
US Passport / N600

My humble opinion:

N600 are not needed. (waist of $)

US Passport will always suffice. (no one can contest your USC status, not even the formerly respected, Donald Trump)

After reading all threads, the only relevant one is the post regarding a lost/stolen passport. But, what the poster forgot to mention is that for an extra $60, the gov can actually perform a "records request search" (based on prior applications on record), and ultimately utilize those results as documentation for the replacement of your passport (form ds11). This is, of course, worst case scenario.

Having said that, the Immigration Service should be avoided at all cost.

-natppt
 
My humble opinion:

N600 are not needed. (waist of $)

US Passport will always suffice. (no one can contest your USC status, not even the formerly respected, Donald Trump)

After reading all threads, the only relevant one is the post regarding a lost/stolen passport. But, what the poster forgot to mention is that for an extra $60, the gov can actually perform a "records request search" (based on prior applications on record), and ultimately utilize those results as documentation for the replacement of your passport (form ds11). This is, of course, worst case scenario.

Having said that, the Immigration Service should be avoided at all cost.

-natppt

That is an overly optimistic view that does not take into account the current political developments in the U.S.
In terms of proving U.S. citizenship one now has to deal not only with federal but also with the state authorities. For the latter, their understanding of and regard for the federal U.S. nationality laws is, to put it charitably, rather variable. Fairly recently the Texas DPS implemented a rule under which they accepted a valid U.S. passport as proof of U.S. citizenship only if it showed the place of birth in the U.S. They had to back off after a lawsuit but the case is symptomatic of things to come.
Another recent thread, about someone's experience with the Georgia DMV illustrates a similar situation:
http://forums.immigration.com/showt...ng-Georgia-DDS-(Department-of-Driver-Services)

The guy was updating his citizenship status on his Georgia Driver's license from that of an LPR to that of a U.S. citizen and was told by the clerk that a U.S. passport was not sufficient and that a certificate of naturalization or citizenship was required. It is quite likely that the clerk was either incompetent or that whatever Georgia rule/law he was following is actually invalid in view of the superseding federal laws, but, again, as a practical matter the U.S. passport was insufficient. My impression is that local rules/regulations of this kind are only going to multiply and become more common in the near future. It is better to have a non-expiring back-up document proving U.S. citizenship, just in case.

Also, it is impossible to predict how the federal rules and regulations for issuing U.S. passports might change in the future. It is not all beyond the realm of possibility that the in the future (maybe even the near future) the rules for issuing U.S. passports will become more tight and restrictive.

If, as seems fairly likely, the next U.S. President will be a Republican, e.g. someone like Sara Palin, one could only imagine what kinds of changes are going to happen at the State Department.
 
Fairly recently the Texas DPS implemented a rule under which they accepted a valid U.S. passport as proof of U.S. citizenship only if it showed the place of birth in the U.S. They had to back off after a lawsuit but the case is symptomatic of things to come.

Actually, a pattern of backing off after lawsuits that they are sure to lose are filed is a good thing.

The guy was updating his citizenship status on his Georgia Driver's license from that of an LPR to that of a U.S. citizen and was told by the clerk that a U.S. passport was not sufficient and that a certificate of naturalization or citizenship was required. It is quite likely that the clerk was either incompetent or that whatever Georgia rule/law he was following is actually invalid in view of the superseding federal laws, but, again, as a practical matter the U.S. passport was insufficient.

Georgia DMV clerks are incompetent drooling morons, suitable only for medical research and biofuel. While I too was told that I needed a natz certificate, they accepted a passport without issue.
 
n600 / us passport

"That is an overly optimistic view"

Overly...not really, I have first hand knowledge of this particular subject matter and can certainly attest to the fact a US Passport is adequately and legally binding on any type of issue that may arise. Yes, there are those who will throw red flags to ones status (i.e. birther movement, etc), but, ultimately the truth and policy as written, does prevail.

In the cases you cited, both of them seem to be cases of incompetent state workers who lack training. Lack of training and communication is the fundamental reason cases like these are even on the news. Once legal teams on both sides get involved, the law is implemented accordingly, and the ultimate outcome supports Department of States principles and policy.

As far as the future political climate goes, no politician can undermine the law of the land, not even Palin.

-NATPPT
 
"That is an overly optimistic view"

Overly...not really, I have first hand knowledge of this particular subject matter and can certainly attest to the fact a US Passport is adequately and legally binding on any type of issue that may arise. Yes, there are those who will throw red flags to ones status (i.e. birther movement, etc), but, ultimately the truth and policy as written, does prevail.

In the cases you cited, both of them seem to be cases of incompetent state workers who lack training. Lack of training and communication is the fundamental reason cases like these are even on the news. Once legal teams on both sides get involved, the law is implemented accordingly, and the ultimate outcome supports Department of States principles and policy.

As far as the future political climate goes, no politician can undermine the law of the land, not even Palin.

-NATPPT

In the case of Texas DPS, it was not the case of incompetence, but rather officially adopted agency policy to only accept a U.S. passport as proof of citizenship if the passport showed the place of birth in the U.S.

Regarding Palin and the like-minded politicians - laws and regulations can be changed. If someone very anti-immigration minded becomes a U.S. President, and installs a like-minded person as a Secretary of State, the State Department can change the rules for issuing/renewing passports and make them stricter in various ways (this may happen anyway, even under Obama, given the current political climate). Relevant laws can be changed as well. It seems certain that more states will pass various kinds of local laws similar to (or even worse than) the infamous Arizona law. In this kind of climate having a back-up document proving one's U.S. citizenship seems more than prudent.
 
Regardless which states adopted certain guideline or not.....Federal laws is top dog. (US State Dept issued Passport is in effect, top dog in as far as a document proving who you are as an individual/citizen).

Regarding politicians, not so sure anyone is willing to stand up to our constitution. Our founding fathers wrote about a natural born citizen as it related to this subject. Those natural born citizens can merely ask the passport agency for a passport and that is it. No reason whatsoever in obtaining a citizenship certificate from the service. Immigration (USCIS) need not apply when it comes to beneficiaries of this particular law.

Now, like you said, having a "back-up document" is surely a good reason if in fact you feel as though you need one. But, an American is an American....regardless of how you spin it.

-NATPPT
 
Georgia DMV clerks are incompetent drooling morons, suitable only for medical research and biofuel. While I too was told that I needed a natz certificate, they accepted a passport without issue.

The Georgia DMV (sic - it's actually DDS in Georgia) thread was mine, and I'll say this. The clerk who said I had to show my naturalization certificate, not just a US passport, was friendly and polite. I'm glad TheRealCanadian doesn't work at the DDS. Who would want to encounter someone so misanthropic and mean?
 
Regardless which states adopted certain guideline or not.....Federal laws is top dog. (US State Dept issued Passport is in effect, top dog in as far as a document proving who you are as an individual/citizen).
With all due respect, you seem to underestimate how much inconvenience a state statute can cause you. In the short run, it does not matter whether this particular statute contradicts the federal laws or if it can withstand a lawsuit because in most cases you simply cannot afford to file a lawsuit yourself or wait until someone else does it and wins. You need a driving licence or voter registration card now, not in a year or two. Let's face it - Republicans do not like immigrants (legal or illegal) and they do not like federal government that may be the only government entity to protect immigrants' rights with respect to INA. When Republicans run the state governments, they will try and use every possible opportunity to diminish the importance of federally-issued documents because the "true" Americans who are born in the USA do not even need any federally-issued documents proving their status. They can have all the services they need with only a state-issued birth certificate and a state-issued driving licence/id card.


Regarding politicians, not so sure anyone is willing to stand up to our constitution. Our founding fathers wrote about a natural born citizen as it related to this subject. Those natural born citizens can merely ask the passport agency for a passport and that is it.
Oh, those who violate federal laws and statutes never fail to mention their respect and devotion to the constitution. At the same time, I really do not see how founding fathers are related to the current immigration laws (INA and 14th Amendment). The definition of natural born citizen may change over time, and it has never stayed the same since founding fathers.

No reason whatsoever in obtaining a citizenship certificate from the service. Immigration (USCIS) need not apply when it comes to beneficiaries of this particular law.
Again, we are not even discussing natural born Americans here. The original topic was about immigrant kids who derived their citizenship through their parents. In their case, the USCIS was involved while they were non-citizens, and it would be safer if the USCIS acknowledged their change of status as well.
 
US Passport will always suffice.
That's if it's unexpired. If it's expired it's not considered solid proof of US citizenship. If there is a delay with replacing/renewing it (like what would have happened if the ongoing budget debate resulted in a government shutdown), you're stuck if you're in a situation where you have to prove citizenship (e.g. applying for a driver's license) and you don't have the certificate.
 
When I was renewing my birth country's passport in the 1990s, providing the old passport was sufficient proof of citizenship. But by the time I was renewing it 10 years after that, they added the requirement to provide a birth certificate or citizenship certificate along with the old passport.

I expect the US will do something similar, given the trend of increasing the documentation requirements surrounding immigration and citizenship. About 5 years ago Americans returning from Canada, Mexico, or the Caribbean didn't need a passport. About 10 years ago people could obtain a driver's license in (almost?) any state without proof of immigration status. Within 10 years from now I definitely expect them to require the citizenship certificate or US birth certificate to renew or replace a US passport.
 
I have read almost the entire thread and have some comments and inputs.

1. My experience: At my interview for US citizenship, I asked the IO what I need to do for my son (10 yrs on GC). IO said that I can apply for his passport after my wife & I get the citizenship and that should be good and he will be a US citizen. But the IO did ALSO mention that it is better if you also apply for his certificate of citizenship and gave me a N600 form - reason IO gave was that there are may agencies that are now asking for different information for proof of citizenship and some are asking specifically for Certificate of citizenship. So the IO said why take a chance for your child.

2. My Opinion: I would not want for my child to have to go through any issues in life because I did not take an extra effort to get the N600 done. We've spend a lot of money through the Visa, GC & Citizenship. What a few additional $$ to set things straight for your child.

3. Result: I will be taking my oath in Mid-May and immediately apply for my son's N600 & Passport as well as my passport.
 
Top