FASCINATING AFFAIR! Born in D.C -Mom's American -Been Denied Passport!

PassageBoy

Registered Users (C)
Hello all!

As the caption blurts...i was born in Washington D.C in 1970, the son of a Kenyan diplomat (dad) and Canadian (mom). My mother was also an American at the time but wasn't aware of her citizenship status.

I have always loved America, and indeed my chest always 'swells up' whenever i tell people where i was born. But i had never applied for my US citizenship, as i was sure that the technicality of "diplomatic immunity" would disqualify me.

In 1994, congress passed the Technical Corrections and Amendment Act which drew attention to my mom's claim for US citizenship. (Her mother was a American born in Wisconsin in 1913, and who started raising a family in Canada in 1933, but was denied the ability to transfer citizenship to children born abroad until the law was changed in 1934).

Encouraged by the news, my mom applied for her US passport in 1996 and got it.

That lead to my questioning - if my mom was an American, and even though she never knew it at the time of my birth, would that legitimize my claim for US citizenship too?

I decided to apply for my passport in 2003, but i was turned-down on the grounds that i was the son of a diplomat when i was born...(diplomatic immunity etc...)

I decided that this denial over-looked the FACT that my mom was an American when i was born, and with some determined resolve, i applied for a second time in 2007.

This time round, i decided to explain myself to a consular officer in Halifax, Canada, and this officer agreed to the principle that if my mother was an American when i was born, then the 'diplomatic immunity' clause wouldn't hold any sway with her assessment in my application.

NOTE - i say "IF my mother was an American" as the Halifax lady was convinced that my mom wasn't American when i was born (we told them that my mom hadn't lived in the States until 1969, the year before i was born - this is commonly known as the 'retention requirement').

Sure enough, the second application was turned down with the following statement : "it appears that your mother was not an American when you were born as she regained her US citizenship in 1996."

I have now decided to appeal my case in the Federal Court and the process has already started.

QUESTION: I know i haven't explained the case as well as a lawyer would, but does anyone know of a case similar to mine, in which an American who happens to be married to a Diplomat & who's child was born in the US and has thus been denied citizenship - that i may draw reference to?

I'm just as inept at 'trawling the web!' & Thank you so much for reading!


:) Peace.
 
If you were born in the U.S., wouldn't you have a birth certificate? Or can you contact the hospital where you were born to see if they can print up a record of your birth?
 
Birth certificate won't count.
You're not a citizen at birth because your father was a diplomat and your mother wasn't a US citizen.
Also, you weren't under 18 when your mother acquired citizenship.
And even if she is considered US citizen at birth, she would have had to reside in the US for at least 5 years (and I don't know if a diplomatic visa counts towards that) in order to transmit US citizenship to you.
 
It would not be easy for you to establish that your mother was an American when you were born. Your grandmother had migrated out of US and your mother was born in Canada (from what I understand). Once the revised law was passed in 1994 was the earliest your mother could have claimed American citizenship and she chose the option to become an American in 1996. You were already born and in fact an adult at that time. You are considered born in Kenya since your father was a diplomat at the time of your birth. Court is probably your only option although I still find it difficult to see how you would be able to establish a case for getting US citizenship. Maybe your lawyer thinks otherwise but looking from my point-of-view even trying this might be a mere wastage of time and money (of course note that I am not a lawyer and these are just my personal opinion).

On paper you (and probably your mother) have enjoyed all the immunity of being a diplomats sons/spouses while you were in the US and be away from the obligations that a US citizen normally has, because of your immunity.

Maybe I am missing something but the way I look at this case is as follows: One parent is a Kenyan and the other became a US citizen in 1996 and the child was born in Kenya (on paper at least) in 1970. Do you have any grounds to claim citizenship?
 
I am not a lawyer but you are in a very grey area of section 103.. But it clearly states "Nothing in this subsection or any other provision of law shall be construed as conferring United States citizenship retroactively upon such person during any period in which such person was not a citizen. " So in your specific case you are not a child of US citizen when you are born if you follow the above on the same amendment.. If you read the documents without assuming , you do not qualify as richmondva has written above.. But a good lawyer could help ..
Reference.
http://www.uscis.gov/propub/DocView/publawid/9?hilite=#0-0-0-743
 
I don't know of similar cases, but your approach seems reasonable. Depending on what kind of diplomat your father was at the time of your birth it is possible you were not affected by the diplomatic rule and you might be a citizen. Check my earlier post on http://forums.immigration.com/showpost.php?p=1644963&postcount=5

It seems the pdf that I referred to no longer exists.

On the other hand you would need to find out exactly at what time did your mother become a citizen. Perhaps a N-600 application might help on this, as the certificate is issued with a date that shows when that person became a citizen. It will take a few months to process the N-600. There is also a very small risk that USCIS and Department of State interpret the law differently and that USCIS comes back saying your mother is not a US citizen.

From what I gather in your post you mother was born in Canada, but might have derived US citizenship at some point before you were born. As you know, derivative citzenship law has changed over the years, so it's just a matter of finding out if she became an automatic/derivative citizen before you were born. Usually the derivative citizenship can only be conferred to children (i.e. not adults, so it might be the laws before she turned 18). However, as I've said, the law has changed over the years, perhaps that 1934 law made her a derivative citizen at the time. N-600 is the best way to prove when she became a citizen. Even if she was a citizen at the time of your birth I think she should have complied with what I think you call retention requirement, what I would call residence requirement, perhaps it is one year, as you say, in some more recent laws parents have to have spent I think around 5 years in the States. Rules get complicated. You could try to do the N-600 for your mother first, and then do a N-600 for you. Your N-600 would need to know the date your mother became a citizen, so you can't do both at the same time.

Good luck. I can tell I have seen few cases as convoluted as yours ;)
 
Hello guys (& Gals!)

I'll first like to say a big thank-you to everyone who's replied (and all with very insightful advice!)
 
The Land of the Beautiful!

Hello again!

;) Judging from the fabulous replies which are filled with such insightful opinions, i shouldn't stay away for even a day!

I'll first like to rejoinder with a few more details to my case.

Firstly, richmondva has raised the point that i have no claim to US citizenship...Well, as the 'story-of-my-life' has revealed, i love telling people that i'm "Born-in-the-USA!" (a la 'The Boss'... B. Springsteen!)

Whenever i tell people of my American-Roots, (and especially back-home-in-Kenya), i generally get two kinds of reactions:

- a) "WOW...That means you can apply for your citizenship, yeah?!"

& - b) "Hmm...so you think you're the man, oi?!"

( But it's my first time to 'open-up' on a web-forum though!)

The point that i'm trying to introduce is this: the only time when someone felt i had no claim 'W-H-A-T-S-O-E-V-E-R' to American citizenship...were the 'folks @ the Passport Agency!

(:p AND so richie...which branch of the Feds' you at?)

Secondly, Huracan has given me "some juice to push for the finish line". Yes, i do believe mine is a STRANGE & convoluted one! (That my lawyer's of the same ilk says it all!)

Now to answer some of the questions raised:

1) phx1999 said " i was not the child of a US citizen when i was born" well... it depends on what is more important - what someone IS, and what they're PRESCRIBED to be.

The act of BEING a citizen is defined by the 14th amendment...and the rules for FEDERAL RECOGNITION of that citizenship status is something totally different, and that's where Congress (and the laws they enact) comes in.

To summarize: -My mother was a citizen by birth, but didn't comply with the 'retention requirements of the federal code'...and was deemed to have ceased being a US citizen @ a specific moment in her life (when she turned 23 yrs. old, to be precise!)...and without her desire (and knowledge) of doing so.

I feel that the 14th amendment comes into play whenever we use such 'subliminally dry and terminal' words as 'cease', 'comply' & 'born'...just for the record.

In the famous case, "Afroyim V. Rusk", some light is shed with regard to my case. The Plaintiff (Mr Afroyim ) was deemed to have ceased being a US citizen by his act of voting in a foreign election ( please correct me if i'm wrong...i've been staring @ 'case descriptions' on the 'screen for hours-on-days-on-end!).

The court upheld that Mr Afroyim was wrongfully denied by the INS. This verdict was reached by the court as they perceived that Afroyim didn't have the INTENT of losing his US citizenship in voting abroad.

In other words, the court wanted to emphasize that Congress cannot 'nullify' such SERIOUS things as a citizen's birth-right/s...it is only a willful and deliberate act on behalf of the citizen ( by performing acts such as submitting a 'letter-of-renunciation' or partaking in an 'attack-on-the-US') that can PERMANENTLY disenfranchise him.

WOW...or should i say "Mama mia!"

Lets try and return to my intriguing case...Yes, my mom was legally disenfranchised of her citizen STATUS, but note: - not of her BIRTHRIGHTS (as endowed on her by the US Constitution). As she never renounced her US citizenship, the federal law can only revoke the PUBLIC recognition of her votive 'citizen-hood'.

Her birthright is "sancro-sanc" and immutable.

Off-a-tangent...lets take the example of bread. Is unbaked dough...or better still -toast, bread? In substance yes, in recognition, NO! But when crumbs are put in the turkey stuffing...it changes both appearance and taste - it is no longer bread!

Yeah, i know...stuff-it!

SYNOPSIS: Was my mom an American CITIZEN when i was born? In name and 'in federal recognition'...-no.

BUT, was she POSSESSING of her birthrights when i was born? In law derived from the Constitution -YES!

Please don't 'feel' for me - as the Zulu Queen Nnandi would say: "The greater the pain (in childbirth), the greater your love will be!"

:o Ah well...& when will it all end?!

-Peace.

P.S: I'll make good on no. 2) (above) some time tomorrow. I guess it's time to 'retreat-into-my-silicon-cocoon'...for another day that is!

- & thanks so much for reading!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
When only one parent is a citizen, and the child was born outside the US or born in the US with diplomatic immunity, there are rules regarding how long the citizen parent must have resided in the US prior to the birth. For births between December 24, 1952 and November 13, 1986, the citizen parent of a child born in wedlock would need to have lived in the US for 10 years prior to the birth, five of which were after turning 14. So even if your mother was a citizen at your birth, it seems she lacked sufficient presence in the US to confer citizenship to you.

However, this thread is just our layman interpretations, and all of us including you could be wrong in one way or another. I presume you are filing this court case with a lawyer who thinks you have a good chance. Ultimately it will be up to the courts to decide. We hope you will return and report the verdict, including the court precedent or section of the law upon which the decision was based.
 
Was my mom an American when i was born? In name and in recognition -no. BUT -was she possessive of her birthrights when i was born...in law -YES!

And she lost those birthrights, and didn't regain them until after you were born. The law that she regained citizenship under stated that it would not provide a retroactive grant of citizenship, and because of this you were likely not eligible for birthright citizenship under the 14th Amendment.

Under what law do you believe she was a citizen when you were born?
 
I think the OP is a Mombassa Guy, same guy who uses user names associated with Kenya. So, I wouldn't take this issue seriously because such a problem doesn't exist. This language is suspicious...:rolleyes:

Whenever i tell people of my American-Roots, (and especially back-home-in-Kenya), i generally get two kinds of reactions:

- a) "WOW...That means you can apply for your citizenship, yeah?!"

& - b) "Hmm...so you think you're the man, oi?!"

( But it's my first time to 'open-up' on a web-forum though!)



So, how is willing to bet this isn't the same guy? He's using this forum for fun as opposed to requesting serious advise. :eek:
 
Lost...in the semantics!

And she lost those birthrights, and didn't regain them until after you were born.

Under what law do you believe she was a citizen when you were born?

Thanks for you queries and insights into my case.

I have returned to my post and edited it in a few places, so as to try and clarify the 'thought process' in my reasoning. The sentence in my post that you have quoted now reads:

SYNOPSIS: Was my mother a Citizen when i was born? In name and in FEDERAL RECOGNITION, no.

But was she an American possessing of her birthrights when i was born (i.e those 'mother-to-child' rights which are an endemic & immutable trait characterizing her as an AMERICAN, as opposed to those 'state-to-citizen' rights )...in law derived from the Constitution (a.k.a 'jus Sanguinis - latin for 'law-derived-from-blood'), -YES!

& to those posters who are under the impression that this is another poster who's changed his name, and that my case is 'unreal/doesn't exist'...

;) I wish that were the case!
 
SYNOPSIS: Was my mother a Citizen when i was born? In name and in FEDERAL RECOGNITION, no.

But was she an American possessing of her birthrights when i was born (i.e those 'mother-to-child' rights which are an endemic & immutable trait characterizing her as an AMERICAN, as opposed to those 'state-to-citizen' rights )...in law derived from the Constitution (a.k.a 'jus Sanguinis - latin for 'law-derived-from-blood'), -YES!
That's only part of the story. Even if she was a full fledged US citizen at the time of your birth, she would still need to have lived in the US for a sufficient number of years (as described in post #9) before your birth in order for you to be born a citizen. Unless her being a US citizen would mean she did not have diplomatic immunity at the time, such that the lack of such immunity would enable you to be a born citizen from being born on US soil, rather than deriving citizenship from her.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
SYNOPSIS: Was my mother a Citizen when i was born? In name and in FEDERAL RECOGNITION, no.

Thank you. End of story.

But was she an American possessing of her birthrights when i was born (i.e those 'mother-to-child' rights which are an endemic & immutable trait characterizing her as an AMERICAN, as opposed to those 'state-to-citizen' rights )...in law derived from the Constitution (a.k.a 'jus Sanguinis - latin for 'law-derived-from-blood'), -YES!

There's an old adage that when you have a case, you pound the law. When you do not, you pound the table. Looks like the latter here.
 
None of us here are particularly convinced of PassageBoy's claim to citizenship. However, it is his money to waste if he is paying the lawyer for the appeal, not our money. Or maybe he isn't wasting any money because the lawyer is serving pro bono. Either way, it's not us he has to convince, it's the court.
 
Dude, You may have to take this with a grain of salt. I know it may sound cool :cool: to tell your friends, relatives and other insignificant people that you were born in America who probably have no clue about US immigration laws or what diplomatic immunity is; so doesn't matter whether just me or 3 or 4 people here and the feds believe that you are not eligible but that's what matters in the end.

My brother-in-law who until very recently had never been to the US eats, drinks & sleeps US, wears only American, talks like one, music, movies all tastes are like an American; in fact he is probably more Americanized than an American :) (has always been). Each individual on this planet and also from other planets :D who know him or had ever met him thought it was most logical that he would end up in the US once he graduates. But the bitter fact was that he had a real tough time and literally had to plead to enter this country even as a visitor on a VISA for just a month. Doesn't change facts based upon what our friends believe or because one posts a cool "Title" :p in a public forum so that 99% guys start believing or sympathizing with him. I could be working for the Feds, state, county or at the dump yard across the road; :eek: , does that change anything?

By the logic you are trying to provide :rolleyes:; in a hypothetical case if either one of Adam or Eve was born in the US, each one on this earth of 6 billion can claim eligibility for US citizenship. Its just that everyone's parents and grand parents and great grand parents and so on.... did not meet the statuary requirements to be in the US and claim citizenship. :D Just kidding of course before you or someone starts pointing out the differences with your case.

Bottom line is your mother derived citizenship since your grand mother was born in the US. You have used at least 4 times in your post that your mother was a "natural" citizen by birth but the fact is she derived citizenship in 1996 because your grandmother was born here (see the subtle difference with the Afroyim V. Rusk case you are referring to who was probably a USC all the time). Of course I am not really enlightened about that case (so please pardon my ignorance) but this case is about you; not your grand mother who was a born USC. For US immigration purposes they may classify your moms case under the "category" of "Citizenship by Birth" but she she was not born here. In fact since she/you were here as diplomats spouse/son you were practically in Kenya and never in the US from what I understand. And as Jacko has already pointed out; she did not fulfill the requirements of residency for X years (as a non-diplomat USC) in the US prior to your birth and legally only became USC in 1996.

So if you believe in re-incarnation of any sorts you can try the option of being born again to your Mom (since she is a USC now) and that could give you at least a shot :D

This post was NOT meant as an advice and was just for humor; so please do not take it seriously and go by what you or your lawyer sincerely believe in terms of interpreting immigration laws :). Good luck is all I can pass to you! :)
 
Heaven...Can Wait!

Hello 'folks...& Happy Labor Day!

:rolleyes:Is that time of day already?

I mean, the other day i'm accused that i'm another poster (without even a trial!), and now i'm a 'table-pounder', 'grain-of-salt taker' and 'one who has money-to-burn!'

Anyway...i also want to thank you for your efforts and contributions and even though i may still have to sweat for what i believe are JUSTIFIABLE ends...i'll like to think that "America-is-in-me" & it'll soon be "Me-in-America."

:)Peace...Out!

P.S: Naw...i think i'll hang around for a while (it's a free forum, and all that...)

1) TheRealCanadian says: "when you have a case, etc...

It is a historical fact that federal laws can be challenged...in "Afroyim", the federal law claimed that Afroyim had lost his citizenship. If he didn't appeal that law, i don't think i'll also have a case. Federal laws are appealed to the Federal Court, which in turn makes reference to the Constitution, the highest written law in the land.

Indeed, some Supreme Court cases have no written law to refer to... What to pound then?

2) Money-to-burn...Nah, i'm not wasting anything!

End of.

3) I have to convince a court of my arguments. ;) Maybe richmondva thinks i have a as much a chance as the "Cubs landing the pennant"...so be it!

4) My mother is not an "American by birth"...couldn't be further from the truth. In fact all US citizens are equal under the law, even those who were naturalized yesterday!

5) Lastly, Jacko says my mom had to have resided in the US for a specified time in order to transmit citizenship to me. True...but not in my case.

In fact all children born in the US have some recognition under the law. Children born to diplomats are US Permanent Residents - if they so chose to be.

The Foreign Affairs Manual (FAM) goes even further: "Family members of foreign diplomats who are American Nationals or US Permanent Residents enjoy no privileges and immunities" (2 FAM 230.4).

I personally know of a case of an American woman, who lost her citizenship status. Her kids were born in Germany when the mother married another Kenyan diplomat who was working there. Later on she divorced her husband and re-migrated to the States with her kids.

Now, both her & the kids are American again. They didn't have to be 'naturalized' and i hope this has a bearing on my case as the kids were born when their mom had lost her US citizenship...

Maybe i ought to pound the floor as well...:D "It's C-L-O-B-B-E-R-I-N-G time!"

Please feel free to share any details of my case with lawyers, paralegals, students of the law, 'folks-around-the-kitchen-table', etc...

Ciao!
 
5) Lastly, Jacko says my mom had to have resided in the US for a specified time in order to transmit citizenship to me. True...but not in my case.
Your case hinges on the "unless" part of my post #13:
Jackolantern said:
Unless her being a US citizen would mean she did not have diplomatic immunity at the time, such that the lack of such immunity would enable you to be a born citizen from being born on US soil, rather than deriving citizenship from her.
 
Top