Why don't United States enforce that naturalized US citizens renounce citizenship from country of origin?
Does that mean that they are making a false claim of allegiance?
"I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen; that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I will bear arms on behalf of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform noncombatant service in the Armed Forces of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform work of national importance under civilian direction when required by the law; and that I take this obligation freely without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; so help me God.
Answer:
because then they'd be more loyal to this country than the politicians who let them in
that might be embarrassing
Yeap, you're right, double-citizenship doesn't make any sense. You're either with God, or with Satan.
Because US allows dual citizenship,nothing wrong with that
But then the current politicians couldn't have their duel-citizenship and swear allegiance to Israel. They wouldn't want anyone to try them for treason for putting Israel first, before the U.S..
Edit:
"Because people also come here from allied nations. It would bad foreign policy to make waves with our allies. When someone comes from a country that we consider an ally, to say us or them would alienate us from our allies."
So if both countries are in a crisis, which one will they support at the expense of the other? They would be traitor to one of the countries, which is why dual-citizenship should not be allowed.
it is absolutely legal to be a duel citizen
at least these people followed the law to get here
stop bashing legal immigrants you 'll sound like an isolationist
nothing wrong with it. most american's aren't white and have family or roots from other countries. so by your logic-these same people should be denouncing their ethnicity.
Because people also come here from allied nations. It would bad foreign policy to make waves with our allies. When someone comes from a country that we consider an ally, to say us or them would alienate us from our allies.
Actually the person renounces it right in the Oath. So we don't make them go to their embassy, big deal. They are renouncing it in the Oath and their country of origin, if it has an embassy in the U.S., KNOWNS they renounced it as part of the Oath. Why make them go through the extra step of going to their embassy to do it? I have no problem with the way it is done. Also I have no problem with a rare case of Dual-Citizenship. I think they let too many have it, but I think there are some cases where the person should be allowed to have it. There are some cases where the person is from England and has been knighted. To make them renounce that Citizenship would be to make them renounce their title of "Sir" and their knighthood. Don't you think they will be more willing to become a U.S. Citizen if they can keep their knighthood OUTSIDE the U.S. Mind you we still won't really recognize it in this country, we just don't recognize it.
The Immigration information post by website user , MyTend.com not guarantee correctness.
More Immigration Questions and Answers ...