Posted on | March 26, 2012 | No Comments
| MichaelN |
Submitted on 2012/03/26 at 7:19pm
The Current INS Officially Recognizes A Delineation Between Natural-Born and Native-Born. Quote: ““Interpretation 324.2 Reacquisition of citizenship lost by marriage.” Interpretation 324.2 (a)(3) provides: “The repatriation provisions of these two most recent enactments also apply to a native- and natural-born citizen woman who expatriated herself by marriage to an alien…” (Emphasis added.) Then, Interpretation 324.2(a)(7) provides: “(7) Restoration of citizenship is prospective . Restoration to citizenship under any one of the three statutes is not regarded as having erased the period of alienage that immediately preceded it. The words “shall be deemed to be a citizen of the United States to the same extent as though her marriage to said alien had taken place on or after September 22, 1922″, as they appeared in the 1936 and 1940 statutes, are prospective and restore the status of native-born OR natural-born citizen (WHICHEVER existed prior to the loss) as of the date citizenship was reacquired.” And again, Interpretation 324.2(b) provides: “The effect of naturalization under the above statutes was not to erase the previous period of alienage, but to restore the person to the status if naturalized, native, OR natural-born citizen, as determined by her status prior to loss.” https://www.uscis.gov/ilink/docView/SLB/HTML/SLB/0-0-0-1/0-0-0-45077/0-0-0-48575.html Three times in this official INS Interpretation – currently published by the Obama Administration – native-born and natural-born are given separate consideration. And in the third example – from Interpretation 324.2(b) – the INS clearly states that each delineation, “naturalized, native, or natural-born citizen“, is a separate status.” |
Comments
Leave a Reply












29839 Sta Margarita Pkwy, 
Videography by Barbara Rosenfeld 
