I don’t often agree with @danielmgmoylan: but putting aside partisan swipes, and the first couple of minutes on general philosophy of immigration law, he then makes a good conservative case against the ability of governments to remove nationality.
https://twitter.com/danielmgmoylan/status/1478877311609057288
It comes from a Tory perspective that isn’t mine: but ends up in much the same place. And I absolutely agree that citizenship isn’t just a travel document, or a contract that can be torn up by either side at will.
I’d add (he may or may not agree with me) that the fact that the provision bites on those with family or personal connections with other countries (eg Jews or Northern Irish entitled to another country’s citizenship: those with a foreign born parent) is a further deep iniquity.
But I am entirely with him in having a fundamental objection to the idea that a state can just take away citizenship, whoever the person is concerned or whatever they have done (and NB the very wide discretion given to govt as to when it can be taken).
Incidentally - on the actual changes made by this Bill - very pertinent questions by @bricksilk: even if you disagree with Lord Moylan and me and think the power should be there, these are concerning points.
https://twitter.com/bricksilk/status/1478833584232411143
Evergreen point.
https://twitter.com/georgeperetzqc/status/1477263063334240258
And powerful thread - with detail - here.
https://twitter.com/WindrushLives/status/1478037773324017673
File under “a Home Office press release is not law, and doesn’t even bind this Home Secretary, let alone her successors”.
https://twitter.com/stevepeers/status/1478886474074439687
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
