YSK that in the US, denaturalization, the process of revoking a person's citizenship, does not require proof "Beyond reasonable doubt"
YSK that in the US, denaturalization, the process of revoking a person's citizenship, does not require proof "Beyond reasonable doubt"
Denaturalization goes through civil courts and requires only "Clear and convincing evidence" which is a lower standard than "Beyond reasonable doubt"
Excerpt from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_nationality_law#Loss_of_nationality
The process of denaturalization is a legal procedure which results in nullifying nationality. Based upon the 1943 Supreme Court decision of Schneiderman v. United States, clear and convincing evidence must be evaluated in processing a denaturalization action. United States Attorneys for the district in which a defendant resides bring suit in the jurisdiction's Federal District Court. Juries are typically not present and the defendant may be compelled to testify. Failure to testify may result in a presumption of guilt, though defendants can plead against self-incrimination. The standard of proof is not reasonable doubt, but rather clear, convincing, and unequivocal evidence. Decisions may be appealed in federal appellate courts and the Supreme Court. Once the legal process has concluded, the Department of State issues a Certificate of Loss of Nationality.
Standards of Proof in the US: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burden_of_proof_(law)#Clear_and_convincing_evidence
Excerpt:
Clear and convincing proof means that the evidence presented by a party during the trial must be highly and substantially more probable to be true than not and the trier of fact must have a firm belief or conviction in its factuality. In this standard, a greater degree of believability must be met than the common standard of proof in civil actions (i.e. preponderance of the evidence), which only requires that the facts as a threshold be more likely than not to prove the issue for which they are asserted.
Why YSK: If you are a naturalized US citizen, you might want to reconsider if you want to protest and ending up being another Mahmoud Khalil. (Not saying to not protest, just informing you of the risks so you can decide for youself if its worth it or not).
And if you aren't a naturalized US citizen; Why YSK: So you understand that the risks of protesting is higher than the risks of natural-born US Citizens protesting, so I hope you don't judge them too harshly for not protesting.
I'm not even convinced that the Trump admin wouldn't try to use denaturalization upon natural-born citizens and/or deport them for specious reasons.
They do not respect the rule or even the spirit of the law. Finding new and creative ways to interpret statutes is practically a sport to them.
At this point I almost wouldn't mind being deported, if they sent me back to where my ancestors came from (Germany/Poland). Of course, what would actually happen would be getting shipped to that hole in El Salvador instead.
if they sent me back to where my ancestors came from (Germany/Poland)
Do you have citizenship in those countries?
Because you might want to learn about statelessness
I'm not sure if you would get citizenship in those countries just because the US is being autocratic.
My situation tho: I was born in PRC so I had citizenship in China, but, the moment I obtained US Citizenship, according to PRC law, my PRC citizenship is automatically revoked.
So if the US denaturalizes me, I'm so fucked lol. (Not to mention, my anti-CCP speech in the US isn't gonna go well with pooh bear 👀)
You should probably include the actual grounds for denaturalization in your post, not just the standard of proof:
the Nationality Act retained as possible causes of denaturalization, treason, sedition, or conspiring against the United States; employment as an official with policy-making authority of a foreign government; and voluntary renunciation...Fraud, committed in conjunction with an application for naturalization can also make nationality voidable.
The US is one of the only countries on earth where you have to pay ~3’000 USD in fees to lose the citizenship. Ridiculous.
🤣
Or just move to some EU country and just refuse to pay your US taxes, what are they gonna do, arrest you? 😉
Coincidentally the US is also one of the few countries that taxes its citizens who live abroad. So they get double taxed. Both by the US govt and the country they live in.
Or just move to some EU country and just refuse to pay your US taxes, what are they gonna do, arrest you? 😉
Most American citizens have family (like their parents) in the country. If they don’t pay taxes they would be arrested when visiting the US to see their parents on their deathbeds. Or situations like that. Not great.
It’s way worse than that; You have to pay income tax on your entire net worth when you renounce your citizenship. Basically, they say that when you renounce your citizenship, all of your assets are considered “sold” so you need to pay tax on it. The US also requires you to keep paying income taxes for a decade after you have renounced your citizenship. There was a big push around the 2008 crash, where congress became concerned that people would renounce their citizenship to dodge taxes. So they started making laws that required taxes to be paid even after expatriating.
Imagine moving to Germany and renouncing your citizenship, and you’re still paying income tax in America, for the income you made while in Germany.
I bailed out. Fled to Canada, where after 16 years of happiness it now looks as if I might lose my country and be forced to become American again... fuck that. I'd rather die. I'll disappear into the Shield and survive on bass and pickerel for the rest of my life, living like Rambo. Yeah John Rambo was American, but he would've been much better off as a Canadian.
Not to mention when you are an US citizen, you have to pay taxes to us even if you have never even been to us. Green card and the american dream are the biggest scams an immigrant can fall for.
Worth noting that it's against international law to leave a person stateless.
I find it charming when people cite "international law" as if it's really a thing.
Our species is really stuck on the idea that "somebody will do something" and it's just a matter of evidence or a strong enough case.
Sorry, nobody is coming, international law exists only as a wink and a nod between players who want to get something out of each other.
Lol.
What law? Nobody cares about any international "laws" unless they can benefit from them and enforce them in some way.
Umm what is the international police going to come and arrest trump? Do you actually think anyone in this government gives a shit about international law?
Is the US administration aware that there are international laws? And if so does it care? It doesn't seem to care much about the local ones.
International law at worst is just gonna slap some sanctions on us, which is something the current admin is already doing every other day.
Except that countries like Canada has laws that makes it possible to happen
I would be curious to read a reference to that… not that any country cares just they history on how they agreed on something like that
what does international law say about taking over a few foreign countries and a canal or so?
What law - Trump
Lol bring me your huddled masses
It still requires due process.
-
The president appoints judges.
-
Judges can steer the direction of a court proceeding, even in a jury trial.
-
Denaturalization proceedings do not have juries, so the Judge is the sole decider of the law and of the facts. If you get unlucky and get a trump apointee... yea good luck.
-
Even if you win, the government will appeal, and we already know what the Supreme Court looks like.
-
Well, so does/did deporting soccer tattoo guy. But, look where we’re at now.
was gonna say this.
lol, right
How do people like this still exist? Have you not been paying attention??
This is more a reason to protest to me. If I can lose my citizenship by excersising my rights I rather do it sooner than later.
Better to do it before the whole death camp and death squad infrastructure is up and running. Also not a joke, you will get that before the end of the year.
he definitely cannot allow midterm elections happening. I really don't get how judges and congressmen, even if they are republican, cannot see whats in the cards for them on the current track.
The 1943 precedent that established the standard ruled that a man could not be denaturalized by pure virtue of being a card-carrying communist. That would be the precedent for denaturalization, and if MAGA judges ignore that... well they would've ignored a reasonable doubt precedent anyways. I don't think this changes things.
Reasonable doubt applies to criminal law. Civil law only requires the preponderance of evidence.
The fun part is that the supreme Court never actually defined the difference of either so they're fundamentally subjective
To be fair: Beyond reasonable doubt is the highest certainty.
It is probably impossible to achieve that for some of the things you might justifiably deport someone.
The clear and convincing proof part is also plainly ignored, so that's not the issue. The issue is a government that will execute its agenda no matter the law. You cannot stop that within the law as it is void.