Mon Mar 4, 2019, 01:30 PM

Justice Dept. says American-born ISIS bride not a US citizen

Source: CNN

(CNN) The Justice Department is contending that an American-born ISIS bride who drew President Donald Trump's ire last month as she made public pleas to return home with her young son is not a US citizen.

In their first response to a lawsuit that Hoda Muthana's father brought last week in a federal court in Washington, DC, prosecutors said that Muthana was never a US citizen because the UN had not notified American authorities that her father was no longer a diplomat until after her birth.

The Justice Department's filing on Monday doubles down on a claim made last month by Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and narrows her chances of repatriation.

"Muthana is not and has never been a U.S. citizen, and her son likewise is not a U.S. citizen. Settled law applied to the relevant events clearly demonstrates that Plaintiff enjoyed diplomatic-agent-level-immunity until February 6, 1995—after Muthana's birth," prosecutors wrote.

Read more: https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2019/03/04/politics/hoda-muthana-us-citizen-justice-department/index.html

14 replies, 2483 views

Thread info Bookmark this thread Trash this thread

Reply to this thread

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum

Replies to this discussion thread

14 replies	Author	Time	Post
Justice Dept. says American-born ISIS bride not a US citizen (Original post)	Jose Garcia	Mar 2019	OP
Good decision	eissa	Mar 2019	#1
She was born here. Unfortunately they will use this case	gldstwmn	Mar 2019	#2
it would seem that she would have "birthright citizenship" per the 14th amendment but	yaesu	Mar 2019	#3
According to the U.S.Constitution. those born in the U.S. are U.S. citizens.	Stuart G	Mar 2019	#4
You need to read the whole clause, including the "and subject to the jurisdiction thereof," part	PoliticAverse	Mar 2019	#6
To not allow her back is a cowardly act	UpInArms	Mar 2019	#5
Only people "born or naturalized" in the US "and subject to the jurisdiction thereof"	PoliticAverse	Mar 2019	#7
If her parents held diplomatic immunity when she was born	DetroitLegalBeagle	Mar 2019	#8
This case is borderline because it hinges on whether he can or can't be counted as a diplomat.	PoliticAverse	Mar 2019	#9
Yep	DetroitLegalBeagle	Mar 2019	#11
Not quite	FBaggins	Mar 2019	#13
That determination was originally made by the Obama Adminstratuon	ripcord	Mar 2019	#10
Obama, the former law school professor who taught	Jose Garcia	Mar 2019	#12
Pdf of DOJ brief:	dalton99a	Mar 2019	#14

Response to Jose Garcia (Original post)

Mon Mar 4, 2019, 01:49 PM

eissa (4,200 posts)

1. Good decision

Let her rot in the hellhole she helped create.

Reply to this post

Response to Jose Garcia (Original post)

Mon Mar 4, 2019, 01:54 PM

gldstwmn (4,500 posts)

2. She was born here. Unfortunately they will use this case

to f#ck other legitimate people should she not be allowed back. I say let her back, debrief the daylights out of her and follow her every move.

Reply to this post

Response to Jose Garcia (Original post)

Mon Mar 4, 2019, 01:55 PM

yaesu (7,753 posts)

3. it would seem that she would have "birthright citizenship" per the 14th amendment but

there is always the fine print "children born to diplomats and other recognized government officials from foreign countries won't receive U.S. citizenship if born on American soil (Title 8 of the U.S. Code)." The Feds may be bending the timeline to fit their needs, I don't trust anything the Feds do under the orange hitler. Also, you cannot simply give up your citizenship by just saying you no longer want to be a citizen, you must do it officially through the court system, take affirmative action to give it up, like filing an oath, which would cost about $2500.

Reply to this post

Response to Jose Garcia (Original post)

Mon Mar 4, 2019, 01:57 PM

Stuart G (36,569 posts)

4. According to the U.S.Constitution. those born in the U.S. are U.S. citizens.

I do not know what the prosecutors know that is above that clause of the Constitution.

Reply to this post

Response to Stuart G (Reply #4)

Mon Mar 4, 2019, 02:03 PM

PoliticAverse (26,366 posts)

6. You need to read the whole clause, including the "and subject to the jurisdiction thereof," part

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside

Reply to this post

Response to Jose Garcia (Original post)

Mon Mar 4, 2019, 02:01 PM

UpInArms (50,590 posts)

5. To not allow her back is a cowardly act

She was born here ... she is, therefore, a citizen

If the trumpsterfire is so afraid of one woman, who can return and be held accountable for her actions, he destroys yet another part of our justice system and our country’s future

Reply to this post

Response to UpInArms (Reply #5)

Mon Mar 4, 2019, 02:04 PM

PoliticAverse (26,366 posts)

7. Only people "born or naturalized" in the US "and subject to the jurisdiction thereof"

are citizens.

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside

Reply to this post

Response to UpInArms (Reply #5)

Mon Mar 4, 2019, 02:06 PM

DetroitLegalBeagle (1,581 posts)

8. If her parents held diplomatic immunity when she was born

Then the 14th Amendment does not apply to her and she is not a citizen.

Reply to this post

Response to DetroitLegalBeagle (Reply #8)

Mon Mar 4, 2019, 02:09 PM

PoliticAverse (26,366 posts)

9. This case is borderline because it hinges on whether he can or can't be counted as a diplomat.

He apparently wasn't when she was born, but the US apparently didn't receive official notice of this fact until after the birth.

Reply to this post

Response to PoliticAverse (Reply #9)

Mon Mar 4, 2019, 02:18 PM

DetroitLegalBeagle (1,581 posts)

11. Yep

And it will be interesting to see how the courts will rule. The timing issue is an interesting one.

Reply to this post

Response to PoliticAverse (Reply #9)

Mon Mar 4, 2019, 02:49 PM

FBaggins (25,621 posts)

13. Not quite

"Counted as a diplomat" is oversimplified. The question is when did he lose diplomatic immunity (and thus become "subject to the jurisdiction" etc.)... and that happens when the US is told (either by his home country if a diplomat to the US... or by the UN if a diplomat to the UN but in the US) that he no longer has diplomatic immunity. That date appears to be firmly established in this case and was after her birth.

It appears that both the current and Obama's DOJ are correct.

Reply to this post

Response to UpInArms (Reply #5)

Mon Mar 4, 2019, 02:16 PM

ripcord (3,782 posts)