No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Effect of Naturalization Abroad of American Citizens on their Minor Children Born in the United States
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 12 April 2017
Abstract
An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
- Type
- Editorial Comment
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © American Society of International Law 1936
References
1 I Sec. 1994 Revised Statutes, repealed by Act of Sept. 22, 1922, Sec. 6, 42 Stat. 1021.
2 “The Citizenship of Native-born American Women who Married Foreigners before March 2, 1907, and Acquired a Foreign Domicile,” this JOURNAL, Vol. 29 (1935), p. 396.Google Scholar
3 33 and 34 Viet., c. 14, par. 10.
4 Borchard, Diplomatic Protection of Citizens Abroad (1915), p. 608.
5 Flournoy, “Naturalization and Expatriation,” 31 Yale L. J. 848, at 866. See also Burkett v. McCarty, 10 Bush. 758, 760 (Ky. 1874).
6 In State v. Jackson, 79 Vt. 504, 65 Atl. 657 (1906), the power to deprive the child of his native-born American citizenship by act of the expatriated father was denied. But in Ostby v. Salmon, 177 Minn. 289, 225 N.W. 158 (1929), it was affirmed. The Circuit Court of Appeals in the Reid case relied on the recent view of the State Department, which it quotes.
7 36 Op. Atty. Gen. 535 (1932).
8 Ludlam v. Ludlam, 26 N. Y. 356, 376 (1863); U. S. ex rel. Baglivo v. Day, 28 Fed. (2d) 44 (D. C. 1928). Wong Kim Ark v. United States, 169 U. S. 649, 18 Sup. Ct. 456 (1898) (quaere): “Whether any act of himself, or of his parents, during his minority, could have the same effect [expatriation] is at least doubtful.” 15 Op. Atty. Gen. 17, Steinkanler’s case, to effect that “there is no law of the United States under which his father or any other person can deprive him of his birthright.” See other authorities cited by Judge Fee in the District Court, in the Reid case, 6 Fed. Supp. 800, at 805.
9 The amendment of May 24, 1934, 48 Stat. I, 797, does not appear to restrict this right of election unless one of the parents is an alien, when the child must come to the United States at latest at the age of thirteen and take an oath of allegiance after reaching majority.
10 Markwald’s ease, R. v. Francis [1918] 1 K. 13. 617; [1920] 1 Ch. (C. A.) 349.
11 Rev. Stat. 1886, Sec. 26, c. 113.
12 Gey van Pittius, E.F. W., Nationality within the British Commonwealth of Nations (1930), p. 207.Google Scholar
13 Ewart, , “Naturalization,” 31 Canadian Law Times (1911)., 378, at 844. But cf. van Pittius, supra, p. 50.Google Scholar
14 Ewart, , “Naturalization,” 31 Canadian Law Times (1911), 844–5.Google Scholar
15 Ibid., p. 846.
16 4–5 Geo. V, o. 17, Flournoy and Hudson, Nationality Laws, p. 61.
17 Canada, Naturalization Act, 1914, c. 44, s. 35, Rev. Stat. 1927, c. 138, Sec. 7, 10.