No dual-citizenship in government

Homeland Security
1

It seems blindingly obvious that senior members of government and military should owe no allegiance, actual or implied, to any foreign entity.

That we allow this seems to be in the same category of incongruity with country integrity as open borders.

My suggestion therefore is that we forbid dual citizenship for senators, congressmen, executive branch and military above a certain rank.

Policing and enforcing would involve the same types of activity as is associated with treason.

35 Likes
2

Its the biggest conflict of interest there is, to have dual citizens within US government. Purge the duals and you’ll end the swamp.

12 Likes
3

I absolutely agree.

I also believe that you should be required to be at least a 4th generation(Great Grandparent immigrated, or was born here) US Citizen IOT hold any Federal office, and at least 3rd for State office.

Borders are closing, and it is time to restore our national identity. In 60 years this policy will no longer be relevant, or needed.

5 Likes
4

This is a huge problem in our legislature. How can you be loyal to the US with a dual citizenship and allegiance to another country? We must ban anyone with dual citizenship from serving in the congress or senate.

9 Likes
5

Why not ban dual citizenship for US citizenship. If you want to be a part of the US then that’s it, you have no other home to go back to. If you don’t want to be here good, you can leave but to be able to take part in the country you have to be all in.

4 Likes
6

I agree. This post is to add more data and extend the policy by Jerry. People who are dual citizens enjoy many privileges that US only citizens do not. As such, a dual citizen is not able to put America First. It’s not too much to ask dual citizens to pick a side if they desire a life in service to the USA.

  1. No dual citizen shall be allowed US government employment or elected office at the federal, state, or local level.
  2. No dual citizen shall be awarded a US security clearance.
  3. No dual citizens shall be employed by any govt contractor and extended to the military contractors.
  4. dual citizens can be employed in the private sector or run their own business.

Here are all the countries that allow dual citizenship. There are alot!

There are also countries that do not allow dual citizenship, example Japan.

4 Likes
7

Preventing dual citizenship among U.S. government officials is a complex policy issue with implications for national security, representation, and personal rights. Here’s a breakdown of possible approaches to restrict or regulate dual citizenship in U.S. government roles, alongside the pros and cons:

Approaches to Restrict Dual Citizenship in U.S. Government

  1. Legal Requirement to Renounce Foreign Citizenship for Specific Government Roles
  • Proposal: Require all elected federal officials (e.g., President, Vice President, Congress members) and high-ranking appointees (e.g., Cabinet members, national security roles) to renounce any foreign citizenship as a condition of office.
  • Implementation: Amend relevant laws to include a renunciation requirement upon entering office and specify penalties for non-compliance.
  1. Expand Federal Security Clearance Requirements
  • Proposal: Extend existing security clearance policies that prevent dual citizenship for positions requiring access to classified information to include a broader range of roles, especially those involved in foreign policy, intelligence, and defense.
  • Implementation: Review and expand security policies to consider dual citizenship a potential security risk for positions that influence national security and international relations.
  1. Amend the Constitution to Address Dual Citizenship
  • Proposal: Introduce a constitutional amendment prohibiting dual citizens from holding public office in the federal government.
  • Implementation: A constitutional amendment requires approval by a two-thirds majority in both the House and Senate, followed by ratification by three-fourths of the states. This approach is a long and challenging path but would provide a clear legal basis for the restriction.
  1. Strict Disclosure and Monitoring Requirements
  • Proposal: Rather than banning dual citizenship outright, establish requirements for government officials to disclose any foreign citizenship and conduct periodic reviews of any potential conflicts of interest or allegiances.
  • Implementation: Enact legislation requiring transparent disclosures of all foreign ties, citizenships, and foreign financial interests for elected and appointed officials.

Pros of Restricting Dual Citizenship in Government

  1. Enhanced National Security
  • Limiting dual citizenship reduces the potential risk of divided loyalties, especially in roles that influence foreign policy, national defense, and intelligence. This restriction could help mitigate potential vulnerabilities to foreign influence or espionage.
  1. Clearer Allegiance to the United States
  • Restricting dual citizenship for government officials reinforces the expectation that public servants owe undivided allegiance to the U.S. and its interests. This could help prevent conflicts of interest and ensure officials act solely in the country’s best interest.
  1. Increased Public Trust in Government
  • Many citizens may view dual citizenship among officials as a potential conflict of interest. Restrictions could increase public confidence that officials are fully committed to serving U.S. interests without foreign influence.
  1. Simplified Security and Clearance Processes
  • With fewer dual citizens in government, security clearance processes become less complicated, potentially reducing the time and resources spent assessing foreign influences or associations.

Cons of Restricting Dual Citizenship in Government

  1. Potential Violation of Personal Rights
  • Forcing individuals to renounce a foreign citizenship may be seen as an infringement on personal freedoms, especially for naturalized citizens who wish to retain ties to their country of birth. Such restrictions could face legal challenges and public opposition on the grounds of personal autonomy.
  1. Reduced Diversity and Talent Pool in Government
  • Restricting dual citizens could limit the pool of qualified individuals for government roles, especially in areas like foreign policy, where understanding and experience with other cultures and languages can be valuable assets.
  1. Increased Difficulty for Naturalized Citizens
  • Naturalized citizens who hold dual citizenship may face unfair barriers to government service. Given that a significant portion of the U.S. population is foreign-born, this restriction could disproportionately impact diverse representation and inclusivity in government.
  1. Complexity and Enforcement Challenges
  • Enforcing dual citizenship restrictions can be complicated, as some countries do not permit the renunciation of citizenship, and verifying or monitoring renunciations may be challenging. Additionally, dual citizenship can arise through marriage or birth, and enforcement could lead to bureaucratic and logistical issues.

Balancing Options: Policy Recommendations

If banning dual citizenship outright is deemed too restrictive or challenging, a balanced approach may be effective:

  1. Enhanced Disclosure Requirements:
  • Require government officials to disclose dual citizenship status, along with any foreign financial interests or associations. This transparency allows for public oversight without outright banning dual citizens from office.
  1. Targeted Restrictions for Sensitive Roles:
  • Apply stricter dual citizenship restrictions specifically to roles with national security implications or positions that handle classified information, while allowing more flexibility for less sensitive roles.
  1. Clearance-Based Approach for High-Risk Positions:
  • For positions where foreign influence poses a direct risk, such as intelligence, national defense, and foreign affairs, require dual citizens to relinquish foreign citizenship or undergo more rigorous background and clearance procedures.
  1. Periodic Foreign Interest Reviews:
  • Regularly review any foreign ties of officials holding dual citizenship to assess potential conflicts and mitigate undue influence, which could allow dual citizens to serve while maintaining oversight.

Conclusion

Restricting dual citizenship in the U.S. government requires careful consideration of national security concerns, personal freedoms, and diversity in representation. A balanced approach that combines selective restrictions, transparency, and targeted enforcement may offer the best solution, preserving both the integrity of government service and the rights of individuals with dual citizenship.
@Jerryk
image

1 Like
8

Anyone with US citizenship - anyone - should be required to foreswear, renounce and revoke citizenship in any other country, IMO. Citizenship implies loyalty, as you say; but it also includes benefits and privileges that should not be afforded to anyone who wishes to claim dual citizenship. I would go so far as to say that prohibition against dual citizenship should be in the US constitution. It’s far too easy for congress to change laws; it takes a good deal more to change the constitution.

2 Likes
9

american citizens we the people should come first and profit from legal migration alone since anyone can become a citizen through legal avenues

10

Why would banning dual citizenship ever be deemed too restrictive or challenging? I’m obviously in need of education in this matter because I cannot see how it could be. My primary, though not only, concern is that those who hold US citizenship qualify for government benefits.

True, many benefits are paid from taxes assessed against both citizens and non-citizens, but that is a different subject for a different conversation we have. For example, why not exempt non-citizens from certain taxes, not including sales taxes, and deny them access to public education, welfare in its many forms, health care they don’t pay for, et alia?

1 Like
11

well it’s just an idea please feel free to provide your ideas & solutions

12

I thought I already had provided ideas and solutions.

Do those with dual citizenship get to vote in both countries?

I know that the US does not recognize dual citizenship, but other countries do. A person can have US citizenship and citizenship acknowledged by another country, but the US doesn’t acknowledge any other than US citizenship.

Can a person who is a citizen of the US and, say, of Germany vote for POTUS and for the Chancellor of Germany? Why would Germany allow that? I don’t know that Germany recognizes dual citizenship but a friend of mine claims to have both (naturalized) US citizenship and German (birthright) citizenship.

1 Like
13

I see here that some people are saying. You should ban dual citizenship for regular everyday citizens. Why would you do that? People have family in various countries and they go and visit there and stay for long dated periods of time, they need to be able to get hope while staying in that country for whatever amount of time, whether it’s 3 months 6 months or a year. So say they stay in one country, one year, they stay in another country another year or 3 years. They go back and stay 6 months the other country and come back because they’re running their family’s businesses or helping out with whatever family issues they need to help out with and people need the freedom to be able to go and do that without feeling penalized and like they have to start all over again. And they can’t Take care of themselves financially, so no, we should. We should not prevent that. That that would be horrible for those families that are in those situations I know because I’m one of them. My mother is one of them, but if I were to take app an office and the government branch of government And it don’t even matter, I mean, even our police, 4 sheriffs, you know, people down at the at the levels where they’re working with the public and within the public, there cannot be a conflict of interest in having dual citizenship while being in those positions of power is definitely a conflict of interest. And you definitely should not be taking oaths with any foreign anything. No secret societies, no, you win our police right now are owned by the u. N, they take oaths to the u, n, just so people know that’s why they’re wearing the black uniforms now because they’re and they’re being militarized. Because they’re being militarized by the UN to work against us, which is why we’ve seen so much change in how police operate and the police brutality and their mentality and thinking everybody is guilty until proven innocent, or instead of innocent, until proven guilty, because their policies have taken place. Over laws that keep people safe and so what we’re having here is a conflict of interest in they’re laws and policies that belong to corporations and not people and that needs to stop, so there needs to be great reform, oh areas of being a public servant, no matter what it, what it is, even if you’re just the A social worker or you know, II don’t know what else court judges, especially anybody who makes a life-changing decision over someone else’s life should not be having oats anything other than our constitution. They should not be allowed to be participants and any types of secret societies or foreign corporations. Period it is a major conflict of interest and it allows for corruption to run rampant enough is enough. We need reform, and not just Terms & Conditions, but we need perimeters that are in keeping with the Declaration of Independence, The Ten commandments and God’s word, which is your lores of nature and your universal lores, under Sui Juris that are non-negotiable. What is LORES
Love, Order,Resteration, Equity, Salvation. I know a lot of people don’t know this and they don’t understand this because it was hidden from us and it was taken away, but there was a time where this is what we live to buy and things were good because we were living in the golden age and it’s time to bring back that golden age, because we desperately need it.

14

Dual citizenship among members of Congress, the Senate, and other political offices raises legitimate concerns about potential conflicts of interest, divided loyalties, and the perception of compromised decision-making. Therefore, eliminating dual citizenship for those in public office would enhance trust in our leaders and ensure that their commitments are fully aligned with the United States.

  1. Protecting National Interests and Security
  2. Ensure Unbiased Decision-Making
  3. Strengthening Public Confidence in Government
  4. Setting a Clear Standard of Commitment

Holding public office in the United States is an honor and a duty that should require total dedication to the country. By removing any potential for divided loyalties, we can ensure a stronger, more trusted, and more secure government for all Americans.

1 Like
15

The US can also just adopt a no Dual Citizen policy like Japan.
Well done addition to this issue!

16

Hi Jerry,
I voted for your proposal because I think it will be critical in our effort to regain a government…“of the People, by the People, and for the People”.
I appreciate your taking the initiative to forward this policy.

I’m wondering if you would also take a moment to have a look at my proposal for a Truth and Reconciliation Commission and give it a 'like" if it resonates with you? Truth and Reconciliation Commission.

In my mind, these policies are the only way we will ever get to a full disclosure of the Deep State’s treasonous activities that are responsible for so much of the decline of our sacred Democratic Republic.

And maybe we can work together in some way down the road to merge our efforts in order to bring about these polices?

Thank you so much for being a part of this “Policies for the People” effort. Onward!

Steve Coffman

17

@Clarice Cmgutmann
That was one of the least coherent statements I’ve ever read on the Internet. I could make no sense of it. I think you were saying that eliminating dual citizenship would have adverse effects on families. If so, you failed, utterly, to explain how. Oh it might be inconvenient for those affected, but I cannot see how it would work any real hardship that is not offset by the benefits of holding US citizenship.

I would ask you explain, but I don’t want to torture myself trying to read word salad without benefit of paragraphs, punctuation, and correct spelling. While you might have been trying to make a case FOR dual citizenship for US citizens, I fear you rather made a better case against it.