- Reaction score
- 576
Trop vs. Dulles, 1952, the Supreme court penned this line:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/htm...6_0086_ZO.html
Citizenship is not a license that expires upon misbehavior. The duties of citizenship are numerous, and the discharge of many of these obligations is essential to the security and wellbeing of the Nation. The citizen who fails to pay his taxes or to abide by the laws safeguarding the integrity of elections deals a dangerous blow to his country. But could a citizen be deprived of his nationality for evading these basic responsibilities of citizenship? In time of war, the citizen's duties include not only the military defense of the Nation, but also full participation in the manifold activities of the civilian ranks. Failure to perform any of these obligations may cause the Nation serious injury, and, in appropriate circumstances, the punishing power is available to deal with derelictions of duty. But citizenship is not lost every time a duty of citizenship is shirked. And the deprivation of citizenship [p93] is not a weapon that the Government may use to express its displeasure at a citizen's conduct, however reprehensible that conduct may be. As long as a person does not voluntarily renounce or abandon his citizenship, and this petitioner has done neither, I believe his fundamental right of citizenship is secure. On this ground alone, the judgment in this case should be reversed.
That's the U.S. Supreme Court talking.
No, one doesn't lose their citizenship, and protections under the U.S. Constitution--the right to a trial.
James, I do not disagree. The Constitution gives us many rights and freedoms that help us stand above many other countries. But if Anwar al-Awlaki, as stated above, had failed to perform any obligations to his country he would not give up rights or his citizenship. In my opinion Anwar al-Awlaki gave up his citizenship when he became a traitor to his country and pronounced death to all American citizens. If he truly believed that all Americans should die then he should have become a martyr for the cause. But since he did not kill himself then he effectively renounced his citizenship and all rights there of. You can not have it both ways. He was a combatant and got what he deserved. If he was captured he would have been tried as a traitor and executed.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/htm...6_0086_ZO.html
Citizenship is not a license that expires upon misbehavior. The duties of citizenship are numerous, and the discharge of many of these obligations is essential to the security and wellbeing of the Nation. The citizen who fails to pay his taxes or to abide by the laws safeguarding the integrity of elections deals a dangerous blow to his country. But could a citizen be deprived of his nationality for evading these basic responsibilities of citizenship? In time of war, the citizen's duties include not only the military defense of the Nation, but also full participation in the manifold activities of the civilian ranks. Failure to perform any of these obligations may cause the Nation serious injury, and, in appropriate circumstances, the punishing power is available to deal with derelictions of duty. But citizenship is not lost every time a duty of citizenship is shirked. And the deprivation of citizenship [p93] is not a weapon that the Government may use to express its displeasure at a citizen's conduct, however reprehensible that conduct may be. As long as a person does not voluntarily renounce or abandon his citizenship, and this petitioner has done neither, I believe his fundamental right of citizenship is secure. On this ground alone, the judgment in this case should be reversed.
That's the U.S. Supreme Court talking.
No, one doesn't lose their citizenship, and protections under the U.S. Constitution--the right to a trial.
James, I do not disagree. The Constitution gives us many rights and freedoms that help us stand above many other countries. But if Anwar al-Awlaki, as stated above, had failed to perform any obligations to his country he would not give up rights or his citizenship. In my opinion Anwar al-Awlaki gave up his citizenship when he became a traitor to his country and pronounced death to all American citizens. If he truly believed that all Americans should die then he should have become a martyr for the cause. But since he did not kill himself then he effectively renounced his citizenship and all rights there of. You can not have it both ways. He was a combatant and got what he deserved. If he was captured he would have been tried as a traitor and executed.
