Citizenship Fail

[jennabet]

How nice for you. However, the answer should be obvious. The grandfather could legally list only his children. Since he wasn't married, he had no wife to list. Surely you're not suggesting that AliG's grandfather lied on his naturalization papers!!!!

You do understand that AliG is not claiming her father was legitimate, only that he is the child of the man who claimed him as his child. And, according to Italian law, the son of an Italian citizen was also an Italian citizen, with or without a wife.

Yes, that would work fine if it occurred in Italy -- but it didn't. To Italy, there is no proof whatsoever that the naturalized man fathered a son in the United States with an unmarried woman.

[mler]

Utter nonsense!! The man himself acknowledged AliG's father as his child. An Italian citizen is an Italian citizen whether or not he resides in Italy, and he is accorded the same legal rights.

We are referring to an Italian man who acknowledged and accepted his child and has every legal right to confer his citizenship to that child.

And yes, jennebet, there is a need to establish the legal basis for citizenship. If marriage is required to confer citizenship, it must be stated in the law. Surely, Italy's citizenship laws require specifics, not the observations of busybody neighbors.

[jennabet]

The USA can take his word for it and consider that this naturalized citizen fathered a child with an unmarried woman -- but Italy, for the purposes of Italian citizenship jures sanguinis, doesn't have to and should not. If that were the case, half the population of the USA unhappy, for example, with the current administration, would try to claim Italian citizenship.

[jennabet]

We are referring to an Italian man who acknowledged and accepted his child and has every legal right to confer his citizenship to that child.

It may have even been better if he had adopted the child -- but I see that didn't happen either. Yep, sounds like a "slam dunk" case of jures sanguinis to me.

[mler]

This is becoming absurd. First you say the consulate shouldn't take the unmarried woman's word about who fathered her child. Now you say they should not take the father's word that he fathered his child. But they should accept the marriage certificate, which you somehow believe is more accurate than a father's sworn statement in proving paternity.

The job of the consulate is to trace the citizenship line through legal documents. If it chooses to ignore pertinent documents and deny citizenship to someone who is legally entitled to it, it is not doing it's job.

Fortunately, Italian courts do follow Italian law.

[mler]

We are referring to an Italian man who acknowledged and accepted his child and has every legal right to confer his citizenship to that child.

It may have even been better if he had adopted the child -- but I see that didn't happen either. Yep, sounds like a "slam dunk" case of jures sanguinis to me.

LOL. Actually, it should be a slam dunk jure sanguinis case if the consulate were doing its job. A proven Italian citizen claims paternity. Citizen father confers Italian citizenship to child according to Italian law. Adoption unnecessary.

[jennabet]

Again there is no proof he's the father because he wasn't married to this woman -- and there is no one alive who can verify that he even had a relationship with or even KNEW this unmarried woman before the child was born. But you want the consulate just to take his word. Different story if it occurred in Italy (see recommended thread).

[jennabet]

Plus he's long deceased and can't even be called to testify in Italian court so that a judge can decide.

[mler]

There's no proof that the man who was married to your mother is YOUR father. Oh wait, the marriage certificate is proof. But, but, but, how do we know your mother didn't have a love affair and never told your father? After all, this wasn't in Italy where people might notice. Oh wait, the marriage certificate is proof.

BTW, it's clear he KNEW this women since he claimed to be the father of her children, and yeah, I want the consulate to take his word.

[jennabet]

If I had not decided to become recognized as an Italian citizen it would not have mattered if my father was my real father or not. But for Italian citizenship it either had to be proved that he was married to my mother at the time I was born or that there were witnesses available who could testify that he had a relationship with my mother before I was born. It's very simple, really.

[mler]

Actually, you're wrong. According to italian law, you had to prove your father was an Italian. You did that with your birth certificate. Nothing in Italian law says you had to prove your parents were married. Surely at our age, we understand that sex and children often occur outside of marriage. I'm sure Italians understand that too. That's why it's not in the law.

[jennabet]

True but my birth certificate was not in question because my parents were married.

[jennabet]

Regarding Italian citizenship. It's not in the law that parents must be married because everybody who could have fathered a child in Italy was Italian, unless, as I stated previously, an unmarried woman was known to have an affair with a foreigner. Where is it easier for an Italian to have an affair with a foreigner than in the United States? This means no marriage certificate, no one to testify about the relationship, no jures sanguinis. It's very simple, really.

[mler]

Your birth certificate was not in question whether your parents were married or not. Your parentage was not questioned, because your birth certificate is a legal document. Marriage is not confirmation of anything but marriage, despite your assertions to the contrary.

But, really, we are going in circles here, and the repetition is getting tedious.

[mler]

Regarding Italian citizenship. It's not in the law that parents must be married because everybody who could have fathered a child in Italy was Italian, unless, as I stated previously, an unmarried woman was known to have an affair with a foreigner. Where is it easier for an Italian to have an affair with a foreigner than in the United States? This means no marriage certificate, no one to testify about the relationship, no jures sanguinis. It's very simple, really.

You are right; it IS very simple. We simply look to the law. If it's not in the law, it IS NOT the law. Marriage is not required BY LAW for citizenship either in Italy or in the US. And it is the literal law that matters, not what you want it to be or think it should be.

Why don't we just stick with what the law says rather than trying to interpret what is not there.