[markisus]

Isn't this how most nations work? If one's parents are American, they inherit all the rights due to Americans, including the ability to run for political office. This gives the descendants of Americans sovereignty over a chunk of land in North America known as the United States.

[TaylorAlexander]

I generally support tribal rights, but just to clarify all people born in the United States are citizens regardless of ancestry or ethnicity.

[markisus]

Yes there are other routes to sovereignty over US soil other than familial inheritance, including being born on the land or becoming a naturalized citizen.

Still, the predominant route is via a claim to the correct ancestral lineage. Here I mean that one’s ancestors form an unbroken chain of people who also had sovereignty over the land. This route is also the predominant one taken by citizens of most other countries.

[gatvol]

For how many generations back do these claims remain valid? As someone of European ancestry do I have claims in Europe?

[markisus]

I think usually the sovereignty must be handed down through an unbroken chain. This is how monarchy and dynasty worked. Once the chain was broken, then you have a new sovereign entity. I think this is how citizenship works in most countries.

In modernity we have different notions of justice where it becomes meaningful to claim that a chain of sovereignty was unjustly broken from one group of people and handed to another. If this were the case, you might have claims in Europe in some people’s eyes.

Whether this is the actual case or not, parental lineage is a major force that justifies claims of sovereignty in the American legal system and elsewhere.