The Original Tree
Diamond Member
- Thread starter
- #61
Those two decisions almost appear contradictory.It should be against the law to hold duel citizenshipStrobe Talbott, Hill & The Clintons
Did you know Fiona Hill is good friends with Christopher Steele, a British-Russia double agent?
It had been.
The first significant case had been brought to trial by a Mexican, it was denied because the Mexican went to Mexico, lived as a Mexican, held citizenship there, and voted in their elections.
Perez v. Brownell, 356 U.S. 44 (1958)
So, the court ruled, a person can't hold allegiance to two nations at once, and told him to bug off. Seems like a reasoned argument.
. . . or, was it racist?
The second case had been brought to trial by a Jewish American, it was approved, the only real difference, is, the Jewish American instead of fleeing the United States to avoid military service, went to Israel to enlist for military service and voted in their elections. It should be noted, the judge was Jewish. Again, was ethnicity a factor?
Regardless. Since that ruling, duel citizenry has been de facto in this nation.
Afroyim v. Rusk, 387 U.S. 253 (1967)