Thread by @cattusdixit

@Noahpinion wanted me to tell y'all about this new USCIS guidance on citizenship, so here I go. If you get to the end, I promise there will be a cat.
The issue on the table is this policy memo:
uscis.gov/sites/default/…

@Noahpinion /2 The part folks are talking about says, "USCIS no longer considers children of U.S. government employees and U.S. armed forces members residing outside the United States as 'residing in the United States' for purposes of acquiring citizenship under INA s 320."

@Noahpinion /3 To skip to the end, this is symbolically meaningful, a little petty, and probably will affect very few people but not none. I'll explain.

@Noahpinion /4 Details: INA 320 says US citizens' kids born outside the US are automatically citizens as long as, by the time they're 18, they're in the custody of a citizen parent who resides in the US.

@Noahpinion /5 Before the new guidance, citizens in the military or other foreign service were considered to "reside in the US." Now they aren't. So, for their kids to be citizens, they have to come here and intend to stay (or send the kid home to live with another citizen parent). If not--

@Noahpinion /6 Then their kid is not AUTOMATICALLY a citizen. But, they can probably still become a citizen under another provision of the INA, section 322.

@Noahpinion /7 322 lets you get a "certificate of citizenship" for a citizen's kid if the citizen is still living abroad. But, that citizen has to have lived in the us for at least 5 years after age 14. Any 5 will do; they don't have to be in a row.

@Noahpinion /8 So, for military folks or gov't employees abroad who are citizens but haven't lived in the US since they were kids, or at least not for very long, their kids can't become citizens without naturalizing like anyone else.

@Noahpinion /9 Also, under 322, you have to prove eligibility for the kid "to the Attorney General's satisfaction," which could be a weasel clause escaping judicial review.

@Noahpinion /10 So to sum up, for very very few people in unique circumstances, this could actually affect their rights. For most, it's just a bureaucratic hurdle that makes it harder to establish citizenship for their kids, but it's not a disaster.

@Noahpinion /11 Anyone who tells you this is an attempt to undermine birthright citizenship or exclude a big category of people from being citizens is overreacting. But it does seem unnecessary and generally consistent with a desire to make it harder to be a citizen.

@Noahpinion /end here is your promised cat. Wasn't that worth it?