Birthright citizenship

1800_Ladladlad

As discussed in the previous thread Labours Ivana Bacik made a propal to bring back automatic birthright citizenship for children born in Ireland to non-Irish citizens

Under current legislation, children whose parents are not Irish citizens have to wait for at least 5 years to apply for citizenship but now the new proposal to amend the citizenship rules for children which JM McEntee’s plans to bring to Cabinet will now look to reduce the waiting time to 3 years.

In the 2004 referendum Irish citizens overwhelmingly opposed and unanimously voted to prevent automatic citizenship rights to children born in Ireland if neither of their parents are, or are not entitled to be, Irish citizens.

This is all stemming from a bill proposed by an unelected and failed politician from Labour ffs.

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/citizenship-process-to-speed-upfor-children-born-in-ireland-to-non-irish-citizens-40228380.html

CtevenSrowder

Why don't they put it to another referendum? Oh that's right, it'd fail massively. Best to try shoehorn it in another way. Sets a terrible precedent. i wonder if a politician tries something similar in ~13 years with the abortion referendum what Bacik's response would be!

Donald Trump

There is nothing stopping them from legislating for it if they want.

No way should they be touching the constitution unnecessarily. It only went in there in the late 90's due to the GFA and only then because nobody considered the law of unintended consequences or anticipated how it might be abused

Galwayguy35

This is why the Seanad should have been abolished so unelected busybodies like Bacik wouldn't have got the chance to be doing stuff like this.

If this gets through its only a matter of time before they try to bring back automatic birth citizenship which is what the Labour party wants.

Smee_Again

Ivana is elected, she was elected by UCD graduates.

And isn’t this what we voted on? To allow politicians legislate on citizenship.

Galwayguy35

Smee_Again wrote: »

Ivana is elected, she was elected by UCD graduates.

And isn’t this what we voted on? To allow politicians legislate on citizenship.

No and no

Topgear on Dave

Elected by Trinity rather than UCD.

I think we can allow politicians legislate on citizenship.

Pherekydes

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

No and no

The only thing wrong about that is that she was elected by University of Dublin graduates.

Smee_Again

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

No and no

Apologies, it’s Trinity graduates who elected her. That makes her an elected politician.

And it most definitely is what people voted for...

Notwithstanding any other provision of this Constitution, a person born in the island of Ireland, which includes its islands and seas, who does not have, at the time of the birth of that person, at least one parent who is an Irish citizen or entitled to be an Irish citizen is not entitled to Irish citizenship or nationality, unless provided for by law.

That last bit does a lot of heavy lifting.

Galwayguy35

Voters werent informed about that sneaky clause in the referendum back in 04 when we were voting on it, we wanted auto birthright citizenship abolished full stop.

Smee_Again

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

Voters werent informed about that sneaky clause in the referendum back in 04 when we were voting on it, we wanted auto birthright citizenship abolished full stop.

Ah would ya stop, you’re embarrassing yourself now.

The text is published in advance so you know what you’re voting on and it was probably on the ballot itself.

Yellow_Fern

Smee_Again wrote: »

Ah would ya stop, you’re embarrassing yourself now.

The text is published in advance so you know what you’re voting on and it was probably on the ballot itself.

Very delusional to think that any of the campaigns debated that possibility.

Smee_Again

Yellow_Fern wrote: »

Very delusional to think that any of the campaigns debated that possibility.

It was on the refcom literature which I’m sure Galwayguy read from cover to cover.

The Oireachtas will then be in a position to pass legislation which governs how other people born in Ireland may become Irish citizens. At present, legislation provides that every person born in the island of Ireland is entitled to citizenship. If the proposal is passed the Oireachtas will have the power to change the existing legislation if it so wishes but it could not make a change that would affect the constitutional right of citizenship of the child of an Irish citizen parent where that child is born in the island of Ireland.

Yellow_Fern

Smee_Again wrote: »

It was on the refcom literature which I’m sure Galwayguy read from cover to cover.

Again, that is not what people are saying. You are missing the point.

Smee_Again

Yellow_Fern wrote: »

Again, that is what people are saying.

Exactly, so people knew or should have known that future changes to the Nationality or Citizenship rules could be legislated for. I’m not sure why people are saying this isn’t what we voted for when it is.

They need to debate the merits of the proposal to reduce the time period from 5 to 3 years and not spout nonsense about we didn’t vote for this because that just makes them look stupid.

Yellow_Fern

Smee_Again wrote: »

Exactly, so people knew or should have known that future changes to the Nationality or Citizenship rules could be legislated for. I’m not sure why people are saying this isn’t what we voted for when it is.

They need to debate the merits of the proposal to reduce the time period from 5 to 3 years and not spout nonsense about we didn’t vote for this because that just makes them look stupid.

That is moving your argument.

Smee_Again wrote: »

They need to debate the merits of the proposal to reduce the time period from 5 to 3 years and not spout nonsense about we didn’t vote for this because that just makes them look stupid.

Not really nonsense.

Smee_Again

Yellow_Fern wrote: »

That is moving your argument.



Not really nonsense.

No it's not. Whether people bothered to read the literature and inform themselves or not doesn't change what they actually voted on.

It is amusing though reading people complain "this isn't what I voted for" when it quite obviously is and they just didn't understand the question asked.

biko

The referendum was set up in such a way that either you must let jus soli prevail, which most people did not want, or you must let the Oireachtas pass legislation which governs how other people born in Ireland may become Irish citizens.

So a vote for removing jus soli just meant let our politicians decide. However those politicians must know that 80% of the people were against jus soli.

If they change that law now they will disregard one of the biggest votes in Irish history.



More people voted for jus soli to be removed than voted for same-sex marriage.

Fandymo

Smee_Again wrote: »

No it's not. Whether people bothered to read the literature and inform themselves or not doesn't change what they actually voted on.

It is amusing though reading people complain "this isn't what I voted for" when it quite obviously is and they just didn't understand the question asked.

The Oireachtas work FOR the people. They should not be bringing in any changes that are in direct contradiction of what the people want. People understood that it could be changed in law, IF there was a change of the stance of the people of Ireland. There has been no change in stance of the Irish people from what I've seen.

I always found this odd.

What if the parents country doesn't allow children citizenship unless they were born there?

I realise that's an extreme rarity but countries can change their laws just as we did. She's Ireland have a clause that stateless children can claim Irish citizenship?

biko

If this was brought back the incentive for non-Europeans to fly here to give birth would be sky-high.

Not just for Irish benefits etc, but because if you came from Vietnam and had a child here your child, and you, would become EU citizens.
Most of Europe is then your oyster. Maybe you have family in France? Now you can go live there.

Smee_Again

Have people actually read the article? Its not a reintroduction of jus soli, it is a proposed reduction of the amount of time a child born in Ireland has to live here before qualifying for citizenship.

The rules will not apply to children of parents who are illegally resident in Ireland. Are asylum seekers resident here legally? I would assume not so their children would be excluded.

I don't have an issue reducing the time from 5 to 3 years, it seems odd to me that a child born here legally to parents here legally and who has lived their whole life here, is starting school here isn't Irish.

paw patrol

Smee_Again wrote: »

Ivana is elected, she was elected by UCD graduates.

That sentence alone is the definitive reason to not lowering the voting age but actually increasing it.

moceri

The vast Majority of European Countries confer citizenship based on "Jus Sanguinis" ...the right of blood... a principle of nationality law by which citizenship is determined or acquired by the nationality or ethnicity of one or both parents. Why should Ireland be any different? Any change to the current law would make us a target for those unscroupulous enough to use Anchor babies as a route to citizenship. https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/arid-10110647.html

biko

Smee_Again wrote: »

I don't have an issue reducing the time from 5 to 3 years, it seems odd to me that a child born here legally to parents here legally and who has lived their whole life here, is starting school here isn't Irish.

Article:

Under current legislation, children whose parents are not Irish citizens have to wait at least five years to apply for citizenship.

this is normal naturalisation and applies to everyone today.
But if you happen to get a baby here

Children who were born in Ireland but whose parents are not Irish citizens will be able to apply for citizenship within three years of residency
The one-year residency prior to applying for citizenship will remain in place.

This can mean after 1 year. And if your child gets citizenship status, parents do too.
The incentive is to seek asylum here and try to give birth during the process which not seldom lasts over a year.

The rules will not apply to the children of parents who are illegally resident in the country.

It just a matter of time before the left have changed this too. It will be deemed as inhumane not to.

The only thing this would change is the time, instead of 5 years it would be 3 years.
Nothing else changes
Not sure why the need to change it, but maybe there is something somewhere I haven't heard about.

Smee_Again

biko wrote: »

This can mean after 1 year. And if your child gets citizenship status, parents do too.

Can you explain this because I’m not getting how 3 years can be 1 year.

Yellow_Fern

Niner leprauchan wrote: »

I always found this odd.

What if the parents country doesn't allow children citizenship unless they were born there?

I realise that's an extreme rarity but countries can change their laws just as we did. She's Ireland have a clause that stateless children can claim Irish citizenship?

The Immigration service are extremely humane and wont let someone become stateless.

biko

Smee_Again wrote: »

Can you explain this because I’m not getting how 3 years can be 1 year.

Maybe my previous post wasn't clear.
The text in the article is Children who were born in Ireland but whose parents are not Irish citizens will be able to apply for citizenship within three years of residency under plans to be considered by Cabinet.
As I read the article - within 3 years means before three years is up, not like today after 5 years.

Let's look at the actual proposal http://www.justice.ie/en/JELR/Pages/PR21000057
Minister McEntee will reduce the amount of time such children have to be resident in the State to become Irish citizens from five years to three years. The number of years a minor must be resident in Ireland will now be two years out of the previous eight, in addition to the requirement to have one year’s continuous residence immediately prior to their citizenship application.
It used to be 4+1, now it's 2+1 - so 3 years indeed.

The Minister states:
“I was glad to work and engage with Senator Ivana Bacik on this proposal, and I look forward to it being implemented as quickly as possible."

Minister McEntee has also committed to exploring whether it would possible for TUSLA to apply for citizenship on behalf of older children in their care in light of particular difficulties they may face.
Doesn't TUSLA handle undocumented migrants that claim be be under 18?

Smee_Again

biko wrote: »

Maybe my previous post wasn't clear.
The text in the article is Children who were born in Ireland but whose parents are not Irish citizens will be able to apply for citizenship within three years of residency under plans to be considered by Cabinet.
As I read the article - within 3 years means before three years is up, not like today after 5 years.

Let's look at the actual proposal http://www.justice.ie/en/JELR/Pages/PR21000057
Minister McEntee will reduce the amount of time such children have to be resident in the State to become Irish citizens from five years to three years. The number of years a minor must be resident in Ireland will now be two years out of the previous eight, in addition to the requirement to have one year’s continuous residence immediately prior to their citizenship application.
It used to be 4+1, now it's 2+1 - so 3 years indeed.

The Minister states:
“I was glad to work and engage with Senator Ivana Bacik on this proposal, and I look forward to it being implemented as quickly as possible."

Minister McEntee has also committed to exploring whether it would possible for TUSLA to apply for citizenship on behalf of older children in their care in light of particular difficulties they may face.
Doesn't TUSLA handle undocumented migrants that claim be be under 18?

I read it as 5 down to 3, the 1 year is how the child must be resident immediately before applying not in totality and for children born and resident here legally I’ve no issue with that changing.

Re: Tusla. I have no idea but if this proposal only affects those born in Ireland they can’t very well claim to be younger than they are. I don’t see any reason to change anything for someone not born on Ireland, child or adult.

is_that_so

Yellow_Fern wrote: »

The Immigration service are extremely humane and wont let someone become stateless.

Not if it's been determined that they are to be deported. Right of residence is not conferred by virtue of an Irish child and there have been one or two cases IIRC where a parent/parents in such scenarios were deported.