There is a long worldwide history of governments stripping away the citizenship of a minority population that they view as a problem for the ruling class.

Thus, we saw Trump trying to use Executive Action to deny birthright citizenship in the future. It’s not the brightest move on his part since it is part of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution. But we all know that it was only the first step in their efforts to strip it away from many individuals with a right to this birthright as guaranteed under that Amendment.

And now, in another desperate move, the trump lawyers are arguing that perhaps native Americans or “Indians,” as they call them, should not have automatic citizenship given their allegiance to their tribe.

Every year, thousands of permanent residents or Green Card holders sign up to fight for America and are promised Citizenship if they serve in the military. When their military service is over, often, the military offices do not help them process the necessary documents to become citizens. These are soldiers who were injured, who are suffering from PTSD, and should have a right to all the benefits granted to veterans, but instead, they are stripped of any chance of Citizenship because they are breaking the law, such as DUI or any other. Should these individuals have a run-in with the legal system, they will probably be deported as would be any undocumented individual without any recognition of their service. The armed services do not keep records of how many immigrants have served in the Army. A small percentage of these veterans have gotten back their right to citizenship and military benefits. But many have died after years of denial of benefits by the USA government.

For years, our government has been stripping people of an important part of their citizenship. Just take a look at the voting laws. It is on the books that a person has a right to vote, but conservatives have made it so difficult to vote if you are a person of color, student, or native American. Thus, they are diminishing one’s citizenship by stripping away an essential part of their being a citizen.

This is a less visible form of citizenship stripping than the total and immediate denaturalization of Citizenship, for in this way, the diminishing of citizenship rights does not get the attention it should.

Many countries are increasing the stripping of rights from those who could be suspected of being terrorists or even knowing or working with terrorists.

In the USA, they could begin targeting individuals who are protesting against the White House policies and, thus, strip them of their right to become naturalized citizens. This denaturalization process could affect millions of individuals, including those married to a person whose rights were stripped.

Stripping today is on the increase internationally

The Naturalization Act of 1906 was the first law in U.S. history that provided for denaturalization/stripping of citizenship. The same act also federalized the naturalization process for the first time in history. (Before the passage of the law, immigrants sought naturalization in state courts.) Federalization allowed millions of European immigrants to become U.S. citizens with ease. Causes for denaturalization under the 1906 Act included fraud, racial ineligibility, and lack of “good moral character.” In 1907, Congress expanded the laws on loss of citizenship by marking for expatriation all U.S.-born citizens who had naturalized in foreign nations and women who had married foreigners. These laws were revised in subsequent years, most notably through the 1940 Nationality Act and the 1952 McCarran Walter Act, which added voting in foreign elections or serving in the armed forces of another country as additional reasons for loss of citizenship. (Curious readers born in the United States should turn to the section titled “Important Information” in their passports, where they can find a list of circumstances that can, on paper, result in loss of citizenship.)

On this page of your American Passport, you will find some pages that talk about important information. In item 13 it tells you how you could lose your citizenship.

You can lose it by being naturalized in a Foreign country, taking an oath or declaration to a foreign government, serving in the armed forces of a foreign country, accepting employment with a foreign Government, and formally denouncing your US citizenship.

Now, we might see our current government removing citizenship to someone fighting for an Arab Country while not affecting individuals who fight for Israel, and this is a god-awful bias. And how do these restrictions on employment by a foreign government affect all the people who are lobbyists for foreign countries? Between 1945 and 1977, it is calculated that 120,770 U.S. citizens lost their American nationality.

One in five countries globally have introduced or expanded the power to deprive citizens of their nationality “on the grounds of disloyalty, national security or terrorism”, says a new study published recently by the Global Citizenship Observatory and the Institute on Statelessness and Inclusion.

Europe is at the epicenter of renewed interest in citizenship stripping: 18 of the 37 countries that expanded their powers are in this region. Among these are countries such as Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Germany, Italy, Latvia, the Netherlands, Norway and the United Kingdom

What happens to an individual who has his or her citizenship stripped from him? ..are they to be deported, and who would take them? Already, some countries will not take back some deportees.

While under international law, everyone has the right to a nationality, including the right not to be arbitrarily deprived of it, 70% of countries currently provide powers in their law for the nationality deprivation that typically apply only to naturalized citizens, who are often from minority groups. This increases both direct and indirect discrimination and serves to bolster and justify racist, xenophobic, and populist narratives.

All this complicates the number of cases of individuals who have been stripped of nationality and reveals the various potential consequences, including expulsion back to the country of former nationality, remaining in limbo in the country of former nationality due to obstacles to deportation, and becoming the burden of a third country because there is nowhere to go.

 ‘Instrumentalizing citizenship in the fight against terrorism is a new dark door that is being opened wider. How have deprivation powers evolved since 9/11 and the subsequent war against terrorism? Yet, at the same time, those who stormed the capitol on January 6th and overthrew a legitimate election did not have their citizenship taken away.

While everyone has the right to nationality under international law, 70% of countries currently allow the deprivation of nationality “due to disloyalty, treason, national security or involvement in terrorism.” Three-quarters of countries lack safeguards to prevent statelessness. Moreover, many laws employ vague language, the interpretation of which is at the discretion of the authority in charge, creating legal uncertainty and the possibility for powers to be ‘stretched’ and abused.

However, there is information that shows also that at least 15 countries either completely repealed deprivation powers or significantly limited them. These countries, based mainly in the Americas and Asia Pacific Region, demonstrate that political decisions to broaden deprivation powers are not always the most decent ones.

Perhaps citizenship might be stripped from those who first pledge their allegiance to Pachamama or Mother Earth!

All Human Rights groups must work together to protect the right to Citizenship of everyone.