Almost certainly unconstitutional, at least under existing precedent (SCOTUS decisions in Afroyim and Terrazas). But it’s never going to get that far - too many on both sides of the aisle (start with Melania and Baron, and all those Italian and Irish dual citizens) who would fight to keep it.
This is nuts. Think that is the appropriate legal term for this 'Exclusive Citizenship Act' bill.
Includes a generic clause that 'An individual may not be a citizen or national of the United States while simultaneously possessing any foreign citizenship.' (Sec 4(b))
What does that even mean?
This will go nowhere but still…
“Totally absurd but probably will stick” is the motto of the T admin.
It’s just one more grift scheme.
Category capped at 40k visas a year. This will probably create backlogs and processing delays for aliens who actually have extraordinary ability
Back to this from a couple of weeks ago. Glad to know that Kimmel has a Plan B if he needs it.
So they found a legal workaround for the “Gold Card” - anyone who donates a million bucks automatically qualifies as an “alien of extraordinary ability”. Totally absurd but probably will stick. No one will have standing to challenge.
But I'm not a tax lawyer so there might be some loophole here that I'm not seeing.
Ah very interesting. Another reason to suspect that she didn't renounce - the expatriation tax. After renouncing she would have the same status as someone who never had citizenship. Not sure how she retains US "residence" without a green card, which she couldn't apply for until after renunciation.
"I love Italy. I like the idea of being a citizen there. And mostly what I like to do is bring my passport to parties and show it to people and make them jealous."
Anyone know if Naomi Osaka actually relinquished her US citizenship? Her name never showed up on the renunciation list and Japan now quietly tolerant of birth dual citizens maintaining the status into adulthood.
Well said, @peterspiro.bsky.social in @nytimes.com on Marco Rubio’s 2016 defense of birthright citizenship.
“There’s no reason why the argument he put to work in 2016 couldn’t be put to work today against the Trump executive order,” Professor Spiro wrote.
www.nytimes.com/2025/08/18/u...
Can Trump revoke citizenship, and how often does it happen worldwide?
> No, and too often.
Informative @washingtonpost.com piece drawing on @globalcit.bsky.social data on the regulation of citizenship revokation around the world.
www.washingtonpost.com/immigration/...
🎯spoke to @aljazeera.com on global citizenship apartheid: m.youtube.com/watch?v=HdHS...
Delight to showcase my @mitpress.bsky.social book❗️Brief summary at @icon-s.bsky.social: papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers....
@globalcit.bsky.social @profjacob.bsky.social @weareceu.bsky.social @peterspiro.bsky.social
The i UK newspaper asked me what's going on with citizenship policies across European countries. Here's why I think we are at a turning point in Europe when it comes to citizenship through naturalisation. And why that is worrying.
inews.co.uk/news/world/w...
Hanging out in Budapest with a great citizenship crowd ❤️
@jdzankic.bsky.social @bronwenmanby.bsky.social @peterspiro.bsky.social
Delighted to join!
I always found identity/countries of origin in pro tennis to be funny. Like on some level they’re all Floridian once they become pros:
I don’t think anyone is prepared for what they just did w/ ICE.
This is not a simple budget increase. It is an explosion - making ICE bigger than the FBI, US Bureau of Prisons, DEA,& others combined.
It is setting up to make what’s happening now look like child’s play. And people are disappearing.
Agree. Govt must prove case by "clear and convincing evidence." This is very different from the immigration context, in which courts are more deferential.
I still believe that denaturalization cases will be relatively rare and that the average immigrant does not need to worry about this. But we can definitely expect to see an increase in cases from around 100-150 a year to maybe double that?
“Fraud” can be broadly defined so definitely cause for concern. SCOTUS 2017 decision below unanimously held that misrep must have been “material”. Courts exercise closer scrutiny here than with respect to immigration policies, but there are probably lots of cases in which govt still prevails.
This is an excellent story, which quotes my @templelaw.bsky.social colleague Laura Bingham. It also provides useful context, showing how the rise of anti-immigrant, technologically powered national security state finds precedents in Obama-era policy. www.npr.org/2025/06/30/n...
Legit terrifying
Second, there will likely be a surge of new class actions against the enforcement of the executive order. Because the Supreme Court expressly said the Executive Order would not take effect for 30 days, that allows class actions to be filed and class-protective preliminary injunctions to be granted throughout the country. Given that the birthright-citizenship executive order is unconstitutional, I expect courts will grant those preliminary injunctions, and they will be affirmed on appeal. I do not expect the President’s executive order on birthright citizenship will ever go into effect.
blog.dividedargument.com/p/initial-th...
from Samuel Bray, an expert on and critic of nationwide injunctions frequently cited in Barrett's opinion:
"I do not expect the President’s executive order on birthright citizenship will ever go into effect."
I'm still reasonably confident that it won't end this way, and that birthright citizenship is validated against the Trump EO. But if it does end this way (and who knows these days), it will a devastating blow to the Constitution as we have known it.
But who knows these days.
