Contents 1 Native-born citizen vs Natural-born citizen 2 Is this an "American" article? 3 Being native born vs being a citizen 4 Intro not accurate 5 Original Research 6 Native-Natural 7 Merge to jus soli

[edit] Native-born citizen vs Natural-born citizen

The article named "natural-born citizen" was renamed to "native-born citizen" (and redirected). This is incorrect. A person born outside the country to citizen parent(s) may be a natural-born citizen for purposes of US presidential eligibility (ex. John McCain, etc). However, such a person would not be a native-born citizen. Therefore, I have split the two articles. The natural-born citizen article is restored and the native-born citizen article was re-written anew.

http://thepostnemail.wordpress.com/2009/10/18/4-supreme-court-cases-define-natural-born-citizen/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.213.91.69 (talk) 23:49, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Is this an "American" article?

This article is placed under a number of America-related categories; is it thus strictly about the American interpretation of "native-born citizen"? Does the legal concept exist in other countries? (There are no articles on this topic in other languages.) If it is in fact limited to America, then the information on other countries (in general or specific) are irrelevant and don't belong, and the descriptions of the concept ought to be worded with direct reference to the U.S. rather than the general "that country".

If the article is not just about America, then the content is fine as is, but it doesn't belong in the American categories. -- Paul Richter (talk) 04:47, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Originally, this was an "American" article because it was renamed from "natural-born citizen". However "natural-born citizen" is a uniquely American term while native-born citizen is a generic term. Therefore this article is no longer an American article but a general one that describes "native-born citizen" as the term is generally understood throughout the world. When a person is described as a "native-born citizen", there are generally two requirements that are understood to be fulfilled:

1) Citizenship at birth - Turks born in Germany who later naturalized are considered "naturalized citizens", but rarely as "native-born citizens". Most people who think of "native-born citizen" would understand that term to mean a person who was a citizen at the time of birth in that country.

2) Born in the country of citizenship - Germans born in, say, Russia who acquired citizenship at birth through descent would not say that they are "native-born citizens" as they were born abroad rather than in their "native land". For a Russian-born German to say he was "native-born citizen" would be quite confusing and he would not describe himself as such. (Rather he would say he was a citizen-at-birth of Germany born abroad).

[edit] Being native born vs being a citizen

The text of the article states, "In many countries (including Japan), a native-born individual may not be a citizen. Sadaharu Oh is not a Japanese citizen despite being born in Japan and having a Japanese mother." Is this correct? Surely it ought to read something like, "In many countries (such as Japan), being native-born is not sufficient to confer citizenship. For example, Sadaharu Oh is not a Japanese citizen despite being born in Japan and having a Japanese mother." Any thoughts? Ondewelle (talk) 08:21, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Your version is a little better so I've changed it out with your text.

It's probably not perfect but I think it's better, since the original was potentially ambiguous. Thanks! Ondewelle (talk) 00:07, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Intro not accurate

I've changed this intro:

A native-born citizen of a country is a person who is legally recognized as that country's citizen from the moment of birth having been born within the country's territory.

to

A native-born citizen of a country is a person who is legally recognized as that country's citizen from the moment of birth while being born within the country's territory.

The difference is subtle but significant. The first implies that the person obtained citizenship by being born in the country of citizenship. The second simply states that the person obtained that country's citizenship at birth and also happened to be born in that country. It needs to be noted that many countries do NOT grant citizenship by being born in that country.

Take Japan for instance. A person born in Japan to Japanese parents is a native-born citizen of Japan. But he is a citizen of Japan only by descent and who just happens to be born in Japan itself. He did not become a citizen of Japan by being born in Japan.

The second intro is more accurately stated.

In fact, very few countries now confer citizenship solely on the basis of birth within the territory. The USA and Canada still do, but almost all other countries that have traditionally done so (generally countries that have English law as the basis of their legal system) have now amended their laws to include additional requirements, generally relating to the status of the parents. For example, the UK and Australia have, since the 1980s, required at least one of the parents to be a citizen or permanent resident for a child to be a citizen if born in the territory. Countries that have recently made a change like this are New Zealand (from the start of 2006) and the Republic of Ireland (from the start of 2005). Ondewelle (talk) 00:06, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Original Research

This article currently claims that on people born in a country are native born citizens. Unless someone can find clear proof that the foreign born children of citizens aren't considered native-born citizens, in addition to being unsourced, it's also original research. Blue-Haired Lawyer 17:04, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

The proof comes from the common definition of the word "native" which means:

belonging to a particular place by birth

belonging to or associated with one by birth

Look it up in any dictionary. Also think about what most people believe when you say that you are a :"native" of a land. It means you were born there. Someone that was "foreign-born" therefore could not be :"native-born" as that is an oxymoron.

[edit] Native-Natural

I'm dubious of the need for this article at all, but in the meantime I've removed the spurious claim that the United States requires its head of state be "native born" and replaced it with a few sentences noting that the President must be "natural born" and that the meaning of this term is disputed. (previous entry, unsigned (Jlwoodhome?))

In that respect it is perhaps interesting to note that the United States Supreme Court has used the terms interchangeably in its opinions. In the Case Law section of the Natural-born citizen Wikipedia article several precedents are referenced. In these cases, for example, the court made no distinction between native born and natural born citizenship. The court wrote in Perkins v. Elg, 307 U.S. 325 (1939): “Young Steinkauler is a native-born American citizen. There is no law of the United States under which his father or any other person can deprive him of his birthright. He can return to America at the age of twenty-one, and in due time, if the people elect, he can become President of the United States; [...]”. In Schneider v. Rusk, 377 U.S. 163 (1964) the Court noted: "We start from the premise that the rights of citizenship of the native-born and of the naturalized person are of the same dignity and are coextensive. The only difference drawn by the Constitution is that only the 'natural born' citizen is eligible to be President.". Bluespaceoddity2 (talk) 05:09, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

I would suggest merging this article to jus soli or nominating it for deletion. If no one can provide a sourced definition of what "native born" means, the latter might be the best choice. Blue-Haired Lawyer 19:20, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Merge to jus soli

All this article really says is:

• Native-born citizen is someone who enjoys his or her citizenship virtue of jus soli.
• Jus soli can be compared with jus sanguinis and naturalisation.
• Many countries don't offer jus soli citizenship or it is very limited.
• The US Constitution requires that the President be a "natural born citizen".
• The article also claims other countries apply a similar restriction to the US but I don't know of any examples.

This article is merely a poor reproduction of the jus soli article. The latter should be changed to mention that citizens by jus soli are sometimes called native-born citizens, and this page should be a redirect. — Blue-Haired Lawyer 13:58, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

It is INCORRECT to say that a native-born citzen is a someone who enjoys his/her citizenship by virtue of jus soli. A native born citizen is simply someone who was a citizen at the time of birth and was born within that country's territory. Many countries do NOT confer citizenship based on place of birth but would still be considered native-born citizens if they were born with that country's territory. A good example is Japan. This is why this article cannot be merged into jus soli.

Does anyone have at least one source for the assertion that people born aborad are in fact native-born citizens, or for that matter for exactly what native-born citizen means. If no one actually can confirm a more precise explanation, this article should be deleted. — Blue-Haired Lawyer 22:34, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

I agree.The persistent use of the legally ambiguous term 'country' rather than the more specific term 'state' has me wondering as to the merits of this article. RashersTierney (talk) 19:56, 16 December 2008 (UTC)