Irvine, CA man may lose U.S. citizenship for lying in his N400

Jackolantern said:
30 years later you have to prove that you naturalized on merit and didn't need a bribe.
Click to expand...

Wrong. Naturalization fraud is a criminal offense, and as such the government must prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt. This is unlike an immigration proceeding which is civil and therefore a lower standard applies. Unless there is specific evidence that you bribed the adjudicating officer, there's no case.

Your case appears that way because of their clerical error, but 20 years later you're on the spot to prove that their records are wrong and yours are right.
Click to expand...

Again, the burden of proof remains on the government. What kind of clerical error are you suggesting will happen to cause denaturalization 20 years later?

If you're so worried about clerical errors, aren't you worried that due to a clerical error the next time you are pulled over for a traffic stop the computer will display you as a wanted cop-killer? Or that your name is a known alias of Osama bin Laden? :) Seriously, if you're so worried about these edge cases you have far more to be concerned about than being denaturalized.

Or you are targeted by the government because you have spoken out against a war or have some other public disagreement with them. So they fish through your life ... questioning your employers and neighbors, digging up your travel records, anything to come up with a creative way to show that you lied on one of those "Have you EVER" questions.
Click to expand...

Again, if the government is out to get you, then they can do far worse things to you than denaturalize you. Either you believe that our government is fundamentally evil, or you don't. If you do, then you shouldn't be here, for your own safety and your family's. My parents fled such a government decades ago.

Conspiracy theory? No, that's history. The US government has a long "tradition" of treating naturalized citizens worse than born citizens and wanting to denaturalize them, and the second-class distinction is even emboldened in the Constitution.
Click to expand...

The US government has naturalized more citizens than any other nation on earth, and has welcomed them to the highest offices in the land short of the top two. I don't see where you get this notion that the government is out to get naturalized citizens and treats them poorly or in a second-class fashion. There are few if not no countries that treat its immigrants and naturalized citizens as well as America. That's the real history, not your conjured up examples that are reaching for straws.
 
Just to throw in my 2 cents, I think that if the government targeted someone who spoke out against war (or any other government policy), it would be much easier and cheaper to arrange an "accident" instead of spending money and effort on denaturalizing someone.
 
Yes. i think we should praise the US for that. In many parts of the world, immigrants are treated like enemies. I know how africans are treated in Europe, how every immigrant is treated in Asia (many countries don't have a naturalization process), and how africans among them hate each other for being from foreign countries.
 
Jedi.Knight and The Real Canadian, please allow me a few observations. I don't think either Jackolantern or I are claiming that this "paranoia" applies to us. In my case I am trying to apply my thought process to the population at large. I am just trying to raise likely hypothetical cases in the future. Governments change, we see it all the time all around the world. If we want the U.S. to remain a great country I believe we have to be vigilant of government and don't give it too much power of snooping into people's lives. Perhaps you disagree too, and will throw things on me suggesting that I am ungrateful or that I don't appreciate my newly gained citizenship. That's not the case. It's not also the case that current denaturalization practices are exaggerated, they are not, they are far and between. However, I think the points that Jackolantern and I raise are still valid, in case the government goes on a hunt in the future, as they have done to several groups of people over the years. I would prefer for everyone to have the full protection of the law than just have the protection of current practices and statistics.
 
Bobsmyth said:
The government has been trying for the last 30 years to denaturalize and deport John Demjanjuk. Up until now they have been unable to deport him since no country will accept him. He is basically a stateless person at this point.
Click to expand...

interesting that you should mention John Demjanjuk... :)

he was on yesterday's news on German-language TV. Apparently Germany
does want him, to stand trial in Germany. I don't see any reason why the US
government won't be happy to comply with Germany's request to send
Demjanjuk to Germany on the next flight out....
 
TheRealCanadian said:
If you're so worried about clerical errors, aren't you worried that due to a clerical error the next time you are pulled over for a traffic stop the computer will display you as a wanted cop-killer? Or that your name is a known alias of Osama bin Laden? :)
Click to expand...
It's much harder for them to find evidence of that, and much easier to refute it, than for them to say their records showed you took a 15-month trip during the 5-year naturalization window and 20 years later you have to prove that you didn't. Or that you weren't telling the truth on a "Have you EVER" question, 20 years later.

Again, if the government is out to get you, then they can do far worse things to you than denaturalize you.
Click to expand...
I know. But it is easier for them to do what they want and get away with it if they can denaturalize their targets first.
Either you believe that our government is fundamentally evil, or you don't. If you do, then you shouldn't be here, for your own safety and your family's.
Click to expand...
Slavery. Jim Crow. Japanese immigrants in WWII. Torturing of those caught in Iraq and Afghanistan. They definitely have demonstrated elements of evil, and I will flee if those become too pervasive in the future.
The US government has naturalized more citizens than any other nation on earth, and has welcomed them to the highest offices in the land short of the top two. I don't see where you get this notion that the government is out to get naturalized citizens and treats them poorly or in a second-class fashion. There are few if not no countries that treat its immigrants and naturalized citizens as well as America. That's the real history, not your conjured up examples that are reaching for straws.
Click to expand...
Yes, they are comparatively generous in that regard, but naturalization still confers second-class citizenship.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
By the way, TheRealCanadian, shame on you ;) (I'm just kidding). You said that there are few if not no countries that treat immigrants and naturalized citizens as well as the U.S., how do you dare to call you TheRealCanadian and not mention Canada among those countries that treat immigrants and naturalized citizens as fairly as in the U.S. if not more? ;)
 
The discussion and arguments have changed from the 'benefits of dual citizenship' to 'putting a curb on government power'.

Extrapolating the remote possibility that the government will somehow maliciously or accidentally put an immigrant in legal/criminal proceedings and on top of it, try to get the immigrant denaturalized and deported... is going a bit too far.

People are more likely to get shot by an American school kid who goes off his/her rocker, than being denaturalized and deported by the government 20 - 30 years from now.

Having dual citizenship won't stop the US government from doing what it wants to do. Besides, the US government does not have any problems with dual citizenship, subject to certain conditions.

Unjustified fear of hypothetical denaturalization and deportation 30 years from now is shaky logic.

The argument for dual citizenship is one of convenience. Plain and simple. As long as it can be done legally, it's fine to do it, even though morally very questionable.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Jackolantern said:
It's much harder for them to find evidence of that, and much easier to refute it, than for them to say their records showed you took a 15-month trip during the 5-year naturalization window and 20 years later you have to prove that you didn't. Or that you weren't telling the truth on a "Have you EVER" question, 20 years later.
Click to expand...

A document from the state claiming that you left the country may be prima facie evidence at best, but it's extremely unlikely to meet the "beyond reasonable doubt" test, especially since it's common knowledge (by the GAO and other government agencies) that exit/entry tracking is horribly flawed.

Seriously, if this is the best claim you can come up with you really need to give up now. There's no way on this planet that such a case by the government could get anyone denaturalized, unless defense counsel is completely incompetent and refuses to offer a defense.

Slavery. Jim Crow. Japanese immigrants in WWII.
Click to expand...

Are you crazy? Slavery was abolished almost 150 years ago just a few years after some European nations did so (and before others did). Jim Crow, rather than being a blot on America, is a shining example because here you had a nation that eliminated a fundamental injustice through legal and peaceful means. How many other "civilized" nations can make such a claim? WRT Japanese immigrants, how many nations during WWII that were at war with Japan didn't intern their Japanese? None. Perhaps next you're going to claim that Italy is an awful nation because the Romans used to feed Christians to the lions. :rolleyes:

Torturing of those caught in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Click to expand...

This is unfortunate, but you can see the revulsion of the American public and the matter is being dealt with. Unlike many other nations whose armed forces continue to act with impunity towards their own citizens.

They definitely have demonstrated elements of evil, and I will flee if those become too pervasive in the future.
Click to expand...

So says you and Alec Baldwin. ;)

Yes, they are comparatively generous in that regard, but naturalization still confers second-class citizenship.
Click to expand...

Comparatively generous???? Good lord you're ungracious. What country is more generous?
 
Huracan said:
You said that there are few if not no countries that treat immigrants and naturalized citizens as well as the U.S., how do you dare to call you TheRealCanadian and not mention Canada among those countries that treat immigrants and naturalized citizens as fairly as in the U.S. if not more? ;)
Click to expand...

Because I've seen how Canada treats immigrants. It shuffles them off into their own isolated ghetto in the name of multiculturalism, and then treats their eduction as worthless if it comes from abroad. A foreign PhD can get you a good job in America if you want to work and do interesting things. A foreign PhD can get you a job as a taxicab driver in Canada.

Canada is a fair country if you want merely to get in and seek basic security. If you are searching for something higher up Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs such as esteem or self-actualization, you're fair more likely to find it in America.
 
Touché ;)

TheRealCanadian said:
Because I've seen how Canada treats immigrants. It shuffles them off into their own isolated ghetto in the name of multiculturalism, and then treats their eduction as worthless if it comes from abroad. A foreign PhD can get you a good job in America if you want to work and do interesting things. A foreign PhD can get you a job as a taxicab driver in Canada.

Canada is a fair country if you want merely to get in and seek basic security. If you are searching for something higher up Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs such as esteem or self-actualization, you're fair more likely to find it in America.
Click to expand...
 
TheRealCanadian said:
Jim Crow, rather than being a blot on America, is a shining example because here you had a nation that eliminated a fundamental injustice through legal and peaceful means.
Click to expand...
Some of the people who implemented or suffered under Jim Crow are still alive. It is a shining example of the evil lengths where the US government has gone, and may go there again if its citizens get too complacent.
WRT Japanese immigrants, how many nations during WWII that were at war with Japan didn't intern their Japanese? None.
Click to expand...
The majority of them were US Citizens, many of whom had no claim to Japanese citizenship because they were neither born there nor had close enough ancestry. How many nations en masse locked up their own citizens like that? And so what if 100 nations did something like that? That wouldn't make it OK, if anything that would show how quick governments are to classify people as second-class citizens and harm them because of that less-than-equal status.
 
Jackolantern said:
Some of the people who implemented or suffered under Jim Crow are still alive. It is a shining example of the evil lengths where the US government has gone, and may go there again if its citizens get too complacent.
The majority of them were US Citizens, many of whom had no claim to Japanese citizenship because they were neither born there nor had close enough ancestry. How many nations en masse locked up their own citizens like that? And so what if 100 nations did something like that? That wouldn't make it OK, if anything that would show how quick governments are to classify people as second-class citizens and harm them because of that less-than-equal status.
Click to expand...

Just to be fair and balanced...

If you thought the Japanese-Americans got mistreated, just look across the border.

The Canadian government did the same thing.

20,000+ Japanese-Canadians were locked up in Canada during WWII. :(
Canadian government treated those people worse than the US government.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_Canadian_internment
 
Last edited by a moderator:
NaturalizedBorg said:
Just to be fair and balanced...

If you thought the Japanese-Americans got mistreated, just look across the border.

The Canadian government did the same thing.

20,000+ Japanese-Canadians were locked up in Canada during WWII. :(
Canadian government treated those people worse than the US government.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_Canadian_internment
Click to expand...
But that's exactly my point. In times of stress, even the governments that are normally among the least sinister will implement such forms of oppression unless there are strong laws against it (and even when there are laws against it some will try anyway, but at least the law can provide another barrier which reduces how many people they target and helps one to fight back or escape).

Naturalized citizens are dependent on the courts being favorable to them in order to keep their citizenship, rather than rights encoded into law. If something like WWIII breaks out and the sentiment changes, you can expect thousands of naturalized to citizens get locked up, or denaturalized and deported.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Jackolantern said:
But that's exactly my point. In times of stress, even the governments that are normally among the least sinister will implement such forms of oppression unless there are strong laws against it
Click to expand...

They can implement such forms of oppression even if there are strong laws against it. Just change the law - problem solved.

I fail to see why you are pushing so hard for a law that can easily be changed. If the American population was strongly anti-immigrant and wanted to strip naturalized citizens of all rights they could easily have the 14th Amendment repealed. So I am puzzled why you feel that a paper law will give you any magical sort of protection.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top