Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T06:40:19.816Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Revocation of Citizenship in the United States*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 June 2011

Ben Herzog
Ben Herzog*
Affiliation:
The Jackson Institute for Global Affairs, Yale University, New haven [[email protected]].
Get access

Abstract

Rogers Brubaker in his 1992 path-breaking study proposes a theory of citizenship as a coherent world view: the French liberal model identifies citizenship as a community based on territoriality; the German ethno-nationalist model bases citizenship on blood-line. Rogers Smith challenged Brubaker and, based on a 1997 study of United States immigration laws, claims that the American concept of citizenship is a non-coherent mix of various principles: liberal, ethno-nationalist and republican at the same time. Both authors inspired a great deal of research, but all studies so far have attempted to adjudicate between the two competing theories by looking at inclusionary practices, at the various ways citizenship is granted in various countries, and their results are inconclusive. This paper reports findings for a study which looked at exclusion. The data on United States laws and legislative debates about the states’ rights to revoke, and citizens’ privilege to renounce, citizenship lends support to Rogers Smith’s arguments regarding inclusion and citizenship, while underlining war as an independent sociological source for the genesis, persistence and dispersion of these bundles or equilibria.

Résumé

En 1992, Rogers Brubaker avait proposé une théorie de la citoyenneté comme vision cohérente du monde et opposé modèle libéral français avec droit du sol, au modèle ethnonationaliste allemand du droit du sang. Roger Smith (1997) a contesté cette thèse et affirmé que le concept de citoyenneté américain est un mixte incohérent de principes hétérogènes : libéral, ethnonationaliste et républicain. Les nombreuses recherches suscitées qui ont traité de l’octroi de citoyenneté ne sont pas concluantes. Notre article apporte des résultats à partir d’une étude de la déchéance de nationalité. Les données des textes législatifs successifs et des débats sur le droit de retirer la citoyenneté et la possibilité pour les citoyens d’y renoncer appuient plutôt les arguments de Smith, tout en faisant observer que les guerres sont des causes extérieures qui bouleversent les équilibres.

Zusammenfassung

1992 hat Rogers Brubaker eine Staatsbürgerschaftstheorie als kohärente Weltansicht vorgeschlagen und das liberale frz. Modell des ius soli dem ethnonationalen dt. Modell des ius sanguinis gegenüber gestellt. Roger Smith (1997) hat diese These widerlegt und behauptet, dass das amerikanische Bürgerkonzept eine inkohärente Mischung aus heterogenen Prinzipien ist: liberaler, ethnonationalistischer und republikanischer Art. Die zahlreichen Studien, die seitdem der Einbürgerung gewidmet worden sind, haben zu keinem wirklichen Ergebnis geführt. Unser Aufsatz liefert Studienergebnisse über den Verlust der Staatsbürgerschaft. Gesetzestexte und Debatten bezüglich des Staatsbürgerschaftsverlustes oder -verzichts untermauern eher die Argumente Smiths, wobei Kriege äußere Anläße darstellen, die das Gleichgewicht stören.

Keywords

CitizenshipLoss of citizenshipImmigrationsWars.CitoyennetéPerte de citoyennetéImmigrationGuerres.StaatsbürgerschaftVerlust der StaatsbürgerschaftEinwanderungKriege.
Type
Research Articles
Information
European Journal of Sociology / Archives Européennes de Sociologie , Volume 52 , Issue 1 , April 2011 , pp. 77 - 109
Copyright
Copyright © A.E.S. 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Abramson, Lawrence, 1984. “United States Loss of Citizenship Law after Terrazas: Decisions of the Board of Appellate Review”, New York University Journal of International law and Politics, 16 (Spring), pp. 829-838.Google Scholar
Agamben, Giorgio, 2005. State of Exception (Chicago, University of Chicago Press).Google Scholar
Aleinikoff, Alexander T., 1986. “Theories of Loss of Citizenship”, Michigan Law Review, 84 (7), pp. 1471-1503.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aleinikoff, Alexander T., Martin, David A. and Motomura, Hiroshi, 2003. Immigration and Citizenship: Process and Policy 5thed. (St. Paul, Thomson/West).Google Scholar
Anonymous 1964. “Laws Governing Migration: The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 as Amended Through 1961”, International Migration Digest, 1 (1), pp. 34-46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Appleman, Irving, 1968. “The Supreme Court on Expatriation: An Historical Review”, Federal Bar Journal, 23 (Fall), pp. 351-373.Google Scholar
Arendt, Hannah, 1973. The Origins of Totalitarianism, new ed. (New York, Harcourt Brace Jovanovich).Google Scholar
Bach, Stanley, 1990. “Suspension of the Rules, the Order of Business, and the Development of Congressional Procedure”, Legislative Studies Quarterly, 15 (1), pp. 49-63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Benhabib, Seyla, 2004. The Rights of Others: Aliens, Residents and Citizens (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bernard, William S., 1998. “Immigration: History of US Policy”, in Jacobson, David, ed., The Immigration Reader: America in a Multidisciplinary Perspective (Malden/Oxford, Blackwell Publishers).Google Scholar
Boudin, Leonard B., 1960. “Involuntary Loss of American Nationality”, Harvard Law Review, 73 (8), pp. 1510-1531.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bourdieu, Pierre and Thompson, John B., 1991. Language and Symbolic Power (Cambridge, Harvard University Press).Google Scholar
Bredbenner, Candice Lewis, 1998. A Nationality of Her Own: Women, Marriage, and the Law of Citizenship (Berkeley/Los Angeles/London, University of California Press).Google Scholar
Brubaker, Rogers, 1989a. “Introduction”, in Brubaker, Rogers, ed., Immigration and the Politics of Citizenship in Europe and North America (Lanham/London, The German Marshall Fund of the United States/University Press of America, pp. 3-6).Google Scholar
Brubaker, Rogers, 1989b. “The French Revolution and the Invention of Citizenship”, French Politics and the Invention of Citizenship, 7 (3), pp. 30-49.Google Scholar
Brubaker, Rogers, 1992. Citizenship and Nationhood in France and Germany (Cambridge, Harvard University Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brubaker, Rogers, 1996. Nationalism Reframed: Nationhood and the National Question in the New Europe (New York, Cambridge University Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burstein, Paul, 1985. “The United States Congress and the Sociological Study of Politics”, Sociology and Social Research: An International Journal, 69 (2), pp. 171-188.Google Scholar
Campi, Alicia J., 2004. The McCarran-Walter Act: A Contradictory Legacy on Race, Quotas, and Ideology (American Immigration Law Foundation).Google Scholar
Cashman, Edward J., 1967. “Fourteenth Amendment Precludes Involuntary Expatriation”, American University Law Review, 17 (December), pp. 86-91.Google Scholar
Casper, Gerhard and Krasner, Stephen D., 2009. “On Citizenship (Book Review: Peter J. Spiro, Beyond Citizenship: American Identity After Globalization)”, The American Interest, 4 (3), pp. 111-116.Google Scholar
Collins, Donald E., 1985. Native American Aliens: Disloyalty and the Renunciation of Citizenship by Japanese Americans during World War II (Westport, Greenwood).Google Scholar
Conover, Pamela Johnston, Crewe, Ivor M., and Searing, Donald D., 1991. “The Nature of Citizenship in the United States and Great Britain: Empirical Comments on Theoretical Themes”, Journal of Politics, 53 (3), pp. 800-832.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cruikshank, Barbara, 1999. The Will to Empower: Democratic Citizens and Other Subjects (Ithaca/London, Cornell University Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dagger, Richard, 1997. Civic Virtues: Rights, Citizenship, and Republican Liberalism, Oxford Political Theory (New York/Oxford, Oxford University Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dugard, John, 1980. “South Africa’s ‘Independent’ Homelands: An Exercise in Denationalization”, Denver Journal of International Law and Policy, 10, pp. 11-36.Google Scholar
Foner, Éric, 1988. Reconstruction: America’s Unfinished Revolution, 1863-1877. First ed., New American Nation Series (New York, Harper & Row).Google Scholar
Gabaccia, Donna R., 2002. Immigration and American Diversity: A Social and Cultural History (Malden/Oxford, Blackwell Publishers).Google Scholar
Graham, Nora, 2004. “Patriot Act II and Denationalization: An Unconstitutional Attempt to Revive Stripping Americans of their Citizenship”, Cleveland State Law Review, 52, pp. 593-621.Google Scholar
Griffith, Elwin, 1988. “Expatriation and the American Citizen”, Howard Law Review 31, pp. 453-496.Google Scholar
Grodzins, Morton, 1955. “Making Un-Americans”, American Journal of Sociology, 60 (6), pp. 570-582.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gross, Emanuel, 2003. “Defensive Democracy: Is it Possible to Revoke the Citizenship, Deport, or Negate the Civil Rights of a Person Instigating Terrorist Action against his own State?”, University of Missouri-Kansas City Law Review, 72, pp. 51-122.Google Scholar
Heineman, Robert, 1994. Authority and the Liberal Tradition: From Hobbes to Rorty. 2nded. (New Brunswick/London, Transaction Publishers).Google Scholar
Hobbes, Thomas, [1651] 1996. Leviathan, edited by Tuck, Richard (Cambridge/New York, Cambridge University Press).Google Scholar
Hoerner, Robert J., 1958. “Constitutional Law: Citizenship: Power of Congress to Effect Involuntary Expatriation”, Michigan Law Review, 56 (7), pp. 1142-1167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Irving, Helen, 2004. “Citizenship and Subject-Hood in Twentieth-Century Australia”, in Boyer, Pierre, Cardinal, Linda and Headon, David, eds., From Subjects to Citizens: A Hundred Years of Citizenship in Australia and Canada (Ottawa, University of Ottawa Press, pp. 9-18).Google Scholar
Isin, Engin F. and Wood, Patricia K., 1999. Citizenship and Identity (London/Thousand Oaks, Sage).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Janoski, Thomas, 1998. Citizenship and Civil Society: A Framework of Rights and Obligations in Liberal, Traditional, and Social Democratic Regimes (Cambridge/ New York, Cambridge University Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Joppke, Christian, 1999. Immigration and the Nation-State: the United States, Germany, and Great Britain (Oxford/New York, Oxford University Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Joppke, Christian and Roshenhek, Zeev, 2001. “Ethnic-Priority Immigration in Israel and Germany: Resilience Versus Demise”, in Working Paper 45. (San Diego, The Center for Comparative Immigration Studies, University of California San Diego).Google Scholar
Kingston, Rebecca, 2005. “The Unmaking of Citizens: Banishment and the Modern Citizenship Regime in France”, Citizenship Studies, 9 (1), pp. 23-40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koessler, Maximilian, 1946. “‘Subject’, ‘Citizen’, ‘National’ and ‘Permanent Allegiance’”, The Yale Law Journal, 56 (1), pp. 58-78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kymlicka, Will, 1995. Multicultural Citizenship: A Liberal Theory of Minority Rights. Oxford Political Theory (Oxford/New York, Clarendon Press).Google Scholar
Lonn, Ella, 1998. Desertion during the Civil War (Lincoln/ London, University of Nebraska Press).Google Scholar
Mann, Michael, 1987. “Ruling Class Strategies and Citizenship”, Sociology 21 (3), pp. 339-354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mariner, Joanne, 2004. Patriot II’s Attack on Citizenship. CNN.com (accessed Dec. 2, 2007).Google Scholar
Mathisen, Ralph W., 2006. “Peregrini, Barbari, and Cives Romani: Concepts of Citizenship and the Legal Identity of Barbarians in the Later Roman Empire”, American Historical Review 11 (4), pp. 1011-1040.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matteo, Henry S., 1997. Denationalization v. “The Right to Have Rights”, The Standard of Intent in Citizenship Loss (Lanham, University Press of America).Google Scholar
Menton, Linda K., 1994. “Research Report: Nisei Soldiers at Dachau, Spring 1945”, Holocaust and Genocide Studies 8 (2), pp. 258-274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, David, 2000. Citizenship and National Identity (Cambridge/ Malden, Polity Press/ Blackwell Publishers).Google Scholar
Nicolosi, Ann Marie, 2001. “‘We Do Not Want Our Girls to Marry Foreigners’: Gender, Race, and American Citizenship”, National Women’s Studies Association Journal, 13 (3), pp. 1-21.Google Scholar
Noiriel, Gérard, 1996. The French Melting Pot: Immigration, Citizenship, and National Identity. Vol. 5, Contradictions of Modernity (Minneapolis, University of Minnesota Press).Google Scholar
Ong, Aihwa, 1999. Flexible Citizenship: The Cultural Logic of Transnationality (Durham, Duke University Press).Google Scholar
Pateman, Carole, 1988. The Sexual Contract (Cambridge, Polity).Google Scholar
Ronner, Amy D., 2005. “Denaturalization and Death: What it means to Preclude the Exercise of Judicial Discretion”, Georgetown Immigration Law Journal 20 (1), pp. 101-132.Google Scholar
Rousseau, Jean-Jacques, [1762] 1997. Of the Social Contract or Principles of Political Right. In The Social Contract and Other Political Writings, edited by Gourevitch, Victor (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press).Google Scholar
Rueschemeyer, Dietrich, 2003. “Can One or a Few Cases Yield Theoretical Gains?” in Mahoney, James and Rueschemeyer, Dietrich, eds., Comparative Historical Analysis in the Social Sciences (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, pp. 3-39).Google Scholar
Ryan, Alan, 1996. “Hobbes’ Political Philosophy”, in Sorell, Tom, ed., The Cambridge Companion to Hobbes (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, pp. 208-245).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmitt, Carl, 1985. Political Theology: Four Chapters on the Concept of Sovereignty, Studies in Contemporary German Social Thought (Cambridge, MIT Press).Google Scholar
Schmitt, Carl, 1996. The Concept of the Political (Chicago/London, University of Chicago Press).Google Scholar
Schuck, Peter H. and Smith, Rogers M., 1985. Citizenship without Consent: Illegal Aliens in the American Polity (New Haven, Yale University Press).Google Scholar
Schwartz, David F., 1982. “Citizenship After Afroyim and Bellei: Continuing Controversy”, Hasting Constitutional Law Quarterly, 2 (Winter), pp. 1003-1028.Google Scholar
Shafir, Gershon and Peled, Yoav, 2002. Being Israeli: The Dynamics of Multiple Citizenship, Cambridge Middle East Studies, 16 (Cambridge/New York, Cambridge University Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sheckels, Theodore F., 2000. When Congress Debates: A Bakhtinian Paradigm (Westport/ London, Praeger).Google Scholar
Shklar, Judith N., 1991. American Citizenship: the Quest for Inclusion, Tanner Lectures on Human Values (Cambridge, Harvard University Press).Google Scholar
Smith, David E., 2004. “Indices of Citizenship”, in Boyer, Pierre, Cardinal, Linda and Headon, David, eds., From Subjects to Citizens: A Hundred Years of Citizenship in Australia and Canada (Ottawa, University of Ottawa Press, pp. 263-286).Google Scholar
Smith, Rogers M., 1997. Civic Ideals: Conflicting Visions of Citizenship in U.S. History (New Haven/London, Yale University Press).Google Scholar
Smith, Rogers M., 2002. “Modern Citizenship”, in Isin, Engin F. and Turner, Bryan S., eds., Handbook of Citizenship Studies (London, Sage Publications, pp. 105-116).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Torpey, John C., 2000. The Invention of the Passport: Surveillance, Citizenship, and the State, Cambridge Studies in Law and Society (Cambridge/New York, Cambridge University Press).Google Scholar
Turner, Bryan S., 1990. “Outline of a Theory of Citizenship”, Sociology, 24 (2), pp. 189-217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
United States, 2001. Citizenship Laws of the World. Washington, DC: U.S. Office of Personnel Management, Investigations Service.Google Scholar
Walzer, Michael, 1983. Spheres of Justice: A Defense of Pluralism and Equality (Oxford, Martin Robertson).Google Scholar
Walzer, Michael, 1992. What it Means to be an American. First ed. (New York, Marsilio: Distributed in the U.S.A. by Rizzoli International Publications).Google Scholar
Weber, Max, 1978. Economy and Society: An Outline of Interpretive Sociology. 2 vols (Berkeley, University of California Press).Google Scholar
Weissbrodt, David and Danielson, Laura, 2005. Immigration Law and Procedure in a Nutshell, fifth edition (St. Paul, Thomson/West).Google Scholar
Williams, David. 2005. A People’s History of the Civil War: Struggles for the Meaning of Freedom (New York, New Press, distributed by W.W. Norton & Co.).Google Scholar
Wright, Joanne H. 2002. “Going Against the Grain: Hobbes’s Case for Original Maternal Dominion”, Journal of Women’s History, 14 (1), pp. 123-155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar