Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by array_key_first 27 days ago
No? If you're born in the US you have US citizenship, you're American. You don't just magically get citizenship for your parents home country, at least not for most countries.
5 comments

You can automatically be a citizen through descent of most countries in Europe and Asia, and everywhere in North America.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jus_sanguinis#Jus_sanguinis_st...

It’s not automatic, it requires applying and at times can take years of proving in terms of paperwork, that is by definition not automatic. I have personal experience with the Greek, German, and Italian systems, prepare your self for 1-2 years to gain it even if you have rights to it.
In some countries it is automatic in others it is not.

Say one of your parents is a citizen of some other country.

If they're Canadian, you're a Canadian citizen. Period. The process is to get your documents that prove it. You don't apply for citizenship, you apply for proof.

In many European countries you are not a citizen. The process is to become one by descent. You apply for citizenship.

Very different.

Why did you need to be a citizen of three countries?
Fair question, though it assumes citizenships are simple things you “use,” which you either need or don’t. They’re not. People attach all sorts of baggage, duties, and rights to them. Mine are a mix of ancestry, residence, and ones I helped my spouse with. They’re not things I “need,” they’re just where my family and life have been. European family trees often produce this. The original point still stands: even when you’re entitled to a citizenship, actually obtaining the documents takes real time and money.
Also, in some cases, you may automatically lose your original nationality if you seek an additional one (Spain comes to mind; though in their case you'd need to manually request not to lose your nationality to keep it within a certain time period, IIRC).

    > You don't just magically get citizenship for your parents home country, at least not for most countries.
Are there any countries where this is not true? I struggle to think of any, especially amoung highly-developed democratic nations. (There might be a couple of weirdo dictatorships that do not allow it.) It seems this would be necessary to prevent statelessness. For example, if your parents are living in the Netherlands as foreigners, children born there are not entitled to automatic Dutch citizenship. As a result, they will obtain citizenship through their parents (in a foreign nation).
Quite a few countries do not allow dual citizenship. So a person who was born in the US and is therefore US citizen at birth will not be allowed to have that country's citizenship until they revoke the US one.

China and Singapore are some of the more prominent examples.

Both of your examples are wrong.

China considers it a "nationality conflict," the child is issued a Travel Document and treated as a citizen domestically, they can still be registered on hukou and get ID card. Apparently they used to unofficially force you to decide as an adult, but stopped a few years ago and now issue the Travel Document for life.

edit to add -- that assumes the parent is not a unconditional green card holder, which is the scenario here.

Singapore allows dual citizenship until 21. Which is not necessarily a good thing, as if you do not do their national service you will effectively get banned from ever going there even if you renounce it later.

Japan and Korea both allow it forever from birth in practice, but the latter also has some complexities regarding the military (either renounce before a certain age or you have some restrictions returning until past a certain age).

> Both of your examples are wrong.

They are not entirely wrong. The person you replied to said "that country's citizenship":

> So a person who was born in the US and is therefore US citizen at birth will not be allowed to have that country's citizenship

Taking example of China, you said "the child is issued a Travel Document and treated as a citizen domestically"

"Treated as a citizen" is not same as "having Citizenship". OCI card holders are India are pretty much treated as citizens, except few rights such as the right of suffrage/ability to engage in agricultural land use etc, but that doesn't make them citizens of India.

There is a huge political difference between OCI and a Chinese travel document. A CTD explicitly lists the bearers nationality as Chinese.

An OCI card, as you said, is effectively like a PR card for former citizens. It is explicitly not citizenship politically and India fully recognizes their foreign citizenship.

If an OCI holder with a US passport gets arrested, India will notify the US consulate as they are a citizen. The same would not apply for a Chinese travel document holder. That is what I meant as “treated as a citizen domestically.”

As to political rights, I assume in practice that one cannot join the Party without first revoking their other citizenship, if at all. But since it is not a democracy, that was never a right/element of citizenship in the first place.

The Netherlands as well.
Most countries determine citizenship eligibility primarily by parentage, not place of birth.
The whole concept of getting citizenship where you're born is mostly an American concept. Though, if you do get born in a place where you get citizenship based on location alone, your parents will probably need to figure out a lot of paperwork to sort things out.
Most of North America and South America operates under Jus sanguinis -- you get citizenship for being born in country, even if your parents are not citizens.
I think you meant “jus soli” (“law of soil”) - “jus sanguinis” means “law of blood.”
You are right!
North America and South America are America, though?