Is it O.K to apply for PP before applying for N600 ?

[ssr1]

Is minor child become citizen automatically once the parent gets naturalized? If so, Can the minor child be applied for PP before apply for N-600 (certificate of naturalization) ? or do we have to apply for N-600 first and then PP? Any expert comments on this please.

 

[Mary Poppins]

Is it O.K to apply for PP before applying for N600 ?

Yes.

Is minor child become citizen automatically once the parent gets naturalized?

Yes.

If so, Can the minor child be applied for PP before apply for N-600 (certificate of naturalization) ?

Yes. Using Nat. Cert. and GC.

do we have to apply for N-600 first and then PP?

No. N-600 is entirely optional (I recommend though).

 

[ssr1]

No. N-600 is entirely optional (I recommend though).

Mary Poppins,

Thanks for your quick response. I am planning to go forward and apply PP for my child.
Additional burden with this is, we have to submit Birth cert. and GC in original along with the
Nat. Cert. of the parent.

If N-600 is entirely optional, then why it is recommended?
Is PP alone not sufficient to serve as a proof of citizenship?

 

[König]

If N-600 is entirely optional, then why it is recommended?
Is PP alone not sufficient to serve as a proof of citizenship?

Certificate of Citizenship is an analogue of the Birth certificate - it has no expiration date and can be used as an ultimate proof of citizenship. Also, it is easier to use Certificate of Citizenship than a passport when dealing with USCIS again (i.e., filing I-130 for relatives, spouse, etc).

Immigration and citizenship issues in this country are dealt by the federal government, and states governments should follow the federal government when dealing with these questions. However, some states apparently do not trust the feds and attempt to institute their own rules of what documents to accept as proof of legal presence. Until recently, the state of Texas refused to accept the US passport as the proof of citizenship if the place of birth in passport was not the USA. They wanted to see either Certificate of Naturalisation, Certificate of Citizenship or consular report of birth abroad for foreign-born citizens. Even though they came to their senses now, nobody could guarantee that some other state will not try to repeat it in the future.

 

[Vorpal]

Until recently, the state of Texas refused to accept the US passport as the proof of citizenship if the place of birth in passport was not the USA. They wanted to see either Certificate of Naturalisation, Certificate of Citizenship or consular report of birth abroad for foreign-born citizens. Even though they came to their senses now, nobody could guarantee that some other state will not try to repeat it in the future.

I remember that whole debacle with the Texas motor vehicle authority. I guess the courts have finally forced them to respect the Constitution?

 

[König]

I remember that whole debacle with the Texas motor vehicle authority. I guess the courts have finally forced them to respect the Constitution?

You know, I was trying to find out why they finally decided to accept US passports unconditionally, but I could not find anything on-line. All the news are quite old from early 2009 when this lawsuit just started. The Texas DPS was quick to change their website as if this ridiculous requirement never even existed

 

[Vorpal]

You know, I was trying to find out why they finally decided to accept US passports unconditionally, but I could not find anything on-line. All the news are quite old from early 2009 when this lawsuit just started. The Texas DPS was quick to change their website as if this ridiculous requirement never even existed

More likely than not, it resulted out of the lawsuit that was filed against the Texas MVA. Perhaps all Texas needed was an explanation that states do not have the authority to override Federal laws.