From: ahk@chinet.com
Stephen Sprunk wrote:
>On 23-Jun-14 04:51, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
>>Stephen Sprunk wrote:
>>>On 22-Jun-14 18:56, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
>>>>Nobody wrote:
>>>>>I would propose that as US Nationals, not being allowed to vote
>>>>>or hold public office within the 50 states/DC is a tad more
>>>>>than just a "pretty minor difference"?
>>>>They carry a US passport, which makes no distinction between a
>>>>citizen and a national.
>>>Wrong.
>>>http://travel.state.gov/content/travel/english/legal-consider
tions/us-citizenship-laws-policies/certificates-of-non-citizen-nationality.html
>>>"the Department determined that those who would be eligible to
>>>apply for such a certificate may instead apply for a United States
>>>passport that would delineate and certify their status as a
>>>national but not a citizen of the United States."
>>Uh, you missed the fact that it's an optional procedure because the
>>State Department didn't want to create a nearly pointless new
>>document. Otherwise, passports for citizens just make a statement
>>about nationality.
>It's unclear to me whether they _always_ get that note on their
>passports or only in the case where they specifically request it, which
>would seem rather odd.
It was quite clear to me that, unless they apply for the specific notion
using the specific form, their passport won't make the distinction.
>Everyone assumes that having a US passport means you're a US citizen,
>but perhaps that's because the number of non-citizen nationals today is
>so small.
It's a distinction in US domestic law, only, meaningless in foreign travel.
Either way, the traveler is a foreign national, so it's perfectly reasonable
that passports wouldn't get into the issue at all.
The former trust territories now in "compact of free association" with
United States, don't conduct their own defence nor foreign relations.
Do they get their passports from the US State Department?
--- SoupGate/W32 v1.03
* Origin: LiveWire BBS -=*=- UseNet FTN Gateway (1:2320/1)
|
