Trump administration tightens policy on children born overseas

NEW YORK (Bloomberg) – The Trump administration said children adopted overseas by US military personnel and government employees serving abroad will no longer be guaranteed citizenship.

A “policy manual update” issued Wednesday (Aug 28) by the US Citizenship and Immigration Services also would affect the children born to non-citizen government employees before they are naturalised.

The new policy means that some members of the military and government employees would no longer be able to automatically pass on their citizenship to their foreign-born children if they themselves haven’t lived in the US for a specified amount of time.

Previously, these families were considered to be residing in the US even while stationed overseas, for immigration purposes. They will be able to apply for citizenship for their children before they turn 18.

The policy won’t affect citizens serving in the military or working for the government overseas or change birthright citizenship for children born within the US according to Ken Cuccinelli, acting director of US Citizenship and Immigration Services.

“This policy update does not affect anyone who is born a US citizen, period,” Cuccinelli said in a statement.

The agency said the policy was changed to conform more closely with the Immigration and Nationality Act. It “rescinds previously established USCIS policy, which stated that certain children who were living outside the United States were considered ‘residing in’ the United States.”

Experts estimate it will affect relatively few people, but they would have to go through an expensive and lengthy application process.

“The harder it is to become a US citizen, the fewer people who get to participate in civic life,” César Cuauhtémoc García Hernández, a law professor at the University of Denver, said in an interview.

García Hernández said that throughout American history, the residency requirements to pass on citizenship to children have shifted, but previous administrations had taken a broader interpretation of what met those standards.

“We are dealing with a small number of people who are particularly sympathetic because they’re people who have decided to join the US military,” he said. “It’s people who have gone out of their way to say we’re willing to serve the US government.”

San Diego immigration attorney Kathrin Mautino called the USCIS policy change “significant,” adding it would make it more difficult for the parents of some children born abroad to prove those children are US citizens and, later when they’re grown up, for the children themselves to prove they automatically became US citizens in the past.

Mautino called US citizenship “a precious right” and warned that the increased paperwork requirements and processes, which all must be completed before a child turns 18, increases the chance that “some children will lose out completely.”

The policy change reflects the larger push from the Trump administration to make legal immigration to the US more difficult, Martin Lester, vice chair of the American Immigration Lawyers Association Military Assistance Program Committee, said in an interview.

“They’re harming the interests of US service members and US government employees who are overseas doing difficult jobs in difficult places because we sent them there,” Lester said. “I can’t for the life of me figure out why our government would want to turn around and change a policy to make it harder on them and harder on their children.”

The initial release of the policy caused wide-spread confusion among immigration advocacy groups, lawyers and the media. Cuccinelli’s statement was released several hours after the policy memo in order to clarify inaccurate interpretations.

“It’s important to have clear cut guidance that is easy to understand, and this is anything but easy to understand,” García Hernández said.

The Center for Immigration Studies, which seeks to limit immigration, praised the policy, however, the military community did not take it as kindly. The policy is a “gratuitous slap at military members,” said Charles Blanchard, the former general counsel for the Air Force and Army. The Modern Military Association of America called the change “preposterous” and called on Congress to take action.

Source: Read Full Article