Bipartisan bills to strip citizenship of Americans complicit in terrorism

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by mkrishnan, May 10, 2010.

  1. mkrishnan Moderator emeritus

    mkrishnan

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Location:
    Grand Rapids, MI, USA
    #1
    http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/05/06/terrorism.act.change/

    The logic of this seems reasonable enough, but I'm concerned by two things... First, as the article points out, there are some questions about when in the due process this can occur, that should be resolved to make sure this is not an end-round of our judicial process. Second, I am uncomfortable with the idea that, if a US citizen joins an international terrorism group, they are stripped of citizenship, but if a US citizen creates and arms a domestic terrorist group with the express aim of overthrowing the US government (or, for that matter, for committing terrorism abroad), the same punishment is not levied.

    Specifically, if Faisal Shahzad would be stripped of his citizenship, I don't understand why the Hutaree should be allowed to continue being citizens....
     
  2. Ugg macrumors 68000

    Ugg

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2003
    Location:
    Penryn
    #2
    I don't like it at all.

    It's also extremely ironic that Lieberman, who is jewish and a staunch defender of all Israeli actions, would sponsor this given how over the top Israel can be when it comes to covert ops.

    Removing a person's citizenship in the case of the islamists only makes them into martyrs and also presents a problem of where to send them after said removal. Personally, I think lifetime imprisonment is enough.
     
  3. Zombie Acorn macrumors 65816

    Zombie Acorn

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2009
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    #3
    Perfectly reasonable in my opinion, if you are making attacks on the nation you are a citizen of you should be stripped of citizenship. If your terrorist act is found in court to have killed an American citizen immediate death penalty.
     
  4. yg17 macrumors G5

    yg17

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2004
    Location:
    St. Louis, MO
    #4
    And sent where? If they no longer have citizenship in any country, where do they go?

    Because juries have never been wrong before :rolleyes:
     
  5. Zombie Acorn macrumors 65816

    Zombie Acorn

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2009
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    #5
    To an island in the ocean for all I care, they shouldn't have been plotting attacks on the government they want to keep their citizenship from.

    As for your second remark we have already determined they engaged in terrorist activity to have their citizenship status removed, if there were casualties we need the death penalty.
     
  6. mkrishnan thread starter Moderator emeritus

    mkrishnan

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Location:
    Grand Rapids, MI, USA
    #6
    Hey, if we're handing out ocean islands, I call dibbs on one before all the terrorist go getting them for free... :p

    I do wonder if the result of this law will be that a process which, to my understanding, under the 1940 law, is really not very commonly invoked, will now start to get used like gangbusters. And I continue to insist that a reasonable and consistent definition of terrorism be used, and supporters of terrorists in Europe, Central America, and elsewhere (including the US), not be given preferred treatment over supporters of Islamist terrorism....
     
  7. Rodimus Prime macrumors G4

    Rodimus Prime

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    #7
    I do not like the law at all. I can see it being abused. Hell right now when some one gets a felony convection they loss the right to vote. You can strip them of a lot of things (like right to vote, right of free speech and so on) but not strip the citizen ship. Plus it is not like some one convected of terrorism is ever going to be set free again.
     
  8. KingYaba macrumors 68040

    KingYaba

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2005
    Location:
    Up the irons
    #8
    Can't take my citizenship without my consent. Lieberman, go see Afroyim v. Rusk and then take a hike. http://www.richw.org/dualcit/cases.html#Afroyim

     
  9. Mac N Tosh macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2009
    Location:
    SouthShore
    #9
    What bothers you more, the fact that he is Jewish or a defender of Israeli actions..?? :confused:
     
  10. mkrishnan thread starter Moderator emeritus

    mkrishnan

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Location:
    Grand Rapids, MI, USA
    #10
    ^^ I'm guessing Ugg is talking about the fact that Israel engages in what many people call state-directed acts that are equivalent to terrorism, and while these proposed bills don't recognize that kind of terrorism, Lieberman and other supporters of the current Israeli regime could be considered as having committed the same crime as supporters of foreign non-state terrorists.

    That one seems less than clear to me; the Afroyim v. Rusk opinion does use the term "consent," but they also open the possibility of other actions that amount to a voluntary renunciation of citizenship. It could be argued that voting in a foreign election does not clearly fall in this category. There are at least some examples of this that are recognized by the US, and it is salient that Mr. Afroyim did not actively seek Israeli citizenship but was apparently granted it automatically -- it was not claimed that he had, AFAIK. Also, although Rogers v. Bellei draws specific reference to the fact that the person involved was not born or naturalized in the USA, it also provides a situation in which passive assent is given by the person (through failure to comply with the new citizenship requirement), causing them to transition from being a citizen to being a non-citizen without providing direct consent.

    Not saying that I think it's right to strip people of citizenship necessarily, but at the same time, I don't think Congress is spinning their wheels in their entirety, enacting a law that has no possible force as a result of existing SC case law.
     
  11. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #11
    Wait, conservatives actually want to give Hitlery Clinton the power to determine if they shall retain their citizenship or not?

    It's funny to see these kinds of constitutional questions arise. Conservatives freak out that the government is coming to take their guns, or to put them in FEMA camps, or to execute old and disabled people. They freak out about these things at the drop of a hat, without a shred of credible evidence.

    Yet they don't care if the government has the power to stop and demand ID without cause, they don't care if people on the terrorist watch list -- who cannot fly because they are considered so dangerous --are allowed to buy guns. They don't care if the government listens in on your phone calls. Yet they want to give the government the power to strip them of their citizenship on the SecState's say-so.

    WTF? Anyone who considers themselves a "strict constitutionalist" should be appalled at this travesty.
     
  12. Peace macrumors Core

    Peace

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2005
    Location:
    Space--The ONLY Frontier
    #12
    Go look up the governments definition of a "terrorist" then get back and say that again.

    This legislation is just bad,bad,bad.

    Not that I support extreme environmentalist but some of them can be called terrorist for throwing paint on a building. Removing their citizenship is very much against the constitution.
     
  13. MacNut macrumors Core

    MacNut

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2002
    Location:
    CT
    #13
    There is a deeper issue here, why did the government not notice that this guy was traveling back and fourth to Pakistan and was obviously being funded by them to commit this crime. I agree in principal that if you are given citizenship and then use that as a shield to commit a terrorist act against the country that you should be stripped of said citizenship. The bigger issue is the fact that we didn't track this guy when flags started going up.
     
  14. Eraserhead macrumors G4

    Eraserhead

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #14
    How can you strip someones citizenship, that is very scary.
     
  15. MacNut macrumors Core

    MacNut

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2002
    Location:
    CT
    #15
    The issue is that they gained citizenship so they could not be tracked when they commit a crime against the country. This really could be considered an inside job.
     
  16. Eraserhead macrumors G4

    Eraserhead

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #16
    Welcome to reality. Terrorism will happen sometimes.

    Frankly if the US doesn't want to be a target it needs to stop interfering abroad and have a non-hypocritical foreign policy.
     
  17. MacNut macrumors Core

    MacNut

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2002
    Location:
    CT
    #17
    That doesn't matter, they just hate us plain and simple. We could have stood by and done nothing and they would still find a reason to hate us.
     
  18. Eraserhead macrumors G4

    Eraserhead

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #18
    The bombs targetting Westerners have only gone off in the UK, US, Spain, Indonesia and India all of which were interfering at the time of the attacks, or in the case of the last two it was a domestic/local international issue.
     
  19. mkrishnan thread starter Moderator emeritus

    mkrishnan

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Location:
    Grand Rapids, MI, USA
    #19
    Doesn't the bigger issue have several threads on it already? Let's talk about citizenship law in this thread, please?
     
  20. MacNut macrumors Core

    MacNut

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2002
    Location:
    CT
    #20
    So that makes it right for them to send bombs out way?
    The fact is this guy got his citizenship a year ago, then decided to set a bomb off in times square? Does that not sound fishy to you? What were his motives to gaining citizenship?
     
  21. Eraserhead macrumors G4

    Eraserhead

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #21
    No, but ultimately you have two options really, you can either ignore them and deal with them like criminals, or you have to deal with the issues behind the violence, like we did in Northern Ireland.
     
  22. tigres macrumors 68040

    tigres

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2007
    Location:
    Land of the Free-Waiting for Term Limits
    #22
    I think it is a little scary on the surface. Ever hear anyone trying to legitimately trying to get off the no-fly list?? Nearly impossible from what is being reported.

    Imagine this happening in error-
     
  23. NT1440 macrumors G4

    NT1440

    Joined:
    May 18, 2008
    #23
    This isn't just for people who have become citizens, it can apply to people who have always been citizens.
     
  24. Gelfin macrumors 68020

    Gelfin

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2001
    Location:
    Denver, CO
    #25
    Can anyone identify for me what problem is solved by this legislation?
     

Share This Page