Omitting Place of Birth on a US Passport....

[antda 13]

More Replies...

Guys, not sure if you have seen this but take a look at this report I found after I googled the issue:

archive.gao.gov/d29t5/133797.pdf

It seems like the biggest concern some parts of the govmnt have is that if US decided to remove birthplace info from passports other countries could follow and then it would make it more difficult for the US border inspection to process and verify people coming to the US...in between the lines they are saying that it would be more difficult for them to profile people if they naturalized in another country (e.g. Canada, France, UK) being originally from a country declared as a sponsor of terrorism. But of course there are other issues raised there.

One important thing is that there is an international convention that dictates what information should be included in the biographic page of the passport and countries that ratified the convention have to adhere to the rules outlined there. So it is not totally at the discretion of the administration. The report is dated 1987...so it's been a while...

Mikey78-Thanks for posting that link about the US Passport birthplace study! (I saved it and bookmarked it on my computer).

What an interesting read, indeed! I couldn't help but notice though, that when reading between the lines, it seems as though they are hiding something. It's like they are saying that "Well, if other countries are not doing this, then why should we?"..So the facts are twisted there....

Lol..No surprise really, especially coming from the government like this. Heck, I wouldn't be surprised if they were the ones that said..

"Hey, let's put the birthplace on the passport" (actually they did that in the 1910s-1920s or so....lol..)..Which set the standards for all other countries...

The US government does have a lot of power in the world, and I'm sure if they make changes regarding this issue too.

Interesting too, that they quoted the Canadian example in that resport.....Yes, Canada does allow a "blank" for a birthplace on the passport (mine is like that actually)....So why can't the US follow suit too?

And you know something...On the report..It says that only 125 people asked for such on the Canadian passport..

Umm..Could it be because not too many people know about this? Or they simply don't care? Or they just accept discrimination because it is the norm to do so?

Nevertheless, discrimination should not be accepted! And it is time to change that!

And if the US wants to screen people...There are other ways to go about this, besides discriminating others because of birth country.....

The report has been awhile, as you said, so who knows, maybe they should examine this issue again....A lot can change in 25+ years or so!

Here's the entire link for that *.pfd file:

http://www.pdfdownload.org/pdf2html/pdf2ht...&images=yes

If you looked at page 14, from polling 25 different countries, ironically, the USA is not one of them, 18 out of those 25 countries said yes to not showing the place of birth on passports. Out of the seven that said no, just three meant no, the other four said on an individual basis. To me an individual basis is the same as saying yes, no objection to be questioned as to whether my wife is a suspected terrorist, so that makes 22 out of 25 countries leaving the place of birth out of the passport.

This study was formed by the same administration that change immigration policy negatively, let health insurance companies add the pre-condition exemption, killed the anti-trust act forcing many small businesses out of business, and ran up a huge national debt and was one the major administrations to affect the freedom of US citizens.

Thank you for posting this, something else to forward to my congressman. If they suspect that a person is a terrorist, can stamp in big red fat letters,

SUSPECTED TERRORIST

and leave the rest of us alone.

NickD-Lol..Interesting that you pointed that out too....About the USA not being on the list....Which is more of a reason to think that the USA is "hiding something" in the fact that they themselves discriminate too.....

And other countries seem to be ok with place of birth not being on a passport, then why not the USA?

As for those countries who don't accept the birth country not being on the passport...Then I say..Let's not go to those countries..

Why go somewhere where one is being discriminated upon? (lol...which is funny that this includes the USA too..though I can't leave here...lol..)

No surprise really, that this came from the US government....(in the 80s..think it was a Republician government back then?)

The same one that discriminates and have other issues that negatively affects its citizens..

Lol..Heck, it was the same government that created the USCIS.....lol....go figure..

Definitely something that should be forwarded.....Good luck in forwarding that to your congressman too..

Lol..I agree.."SUSPECTED TERRORIST" to the terrorists, and "LEAVE THE REST OF US ALONE!"...

No wait, don't they already have a "no fly list" and "FBI background checks"..Isn't that good enough already? lol..

Ant

Edited March 2, 2010 by Ant+D+BabyA

[thebirdman 1]

Just out of curiousity, Ant+D+BabyA, what is your place of birth ? You can send me a PM if you want to.

[CaptainPenguin 5]

Just thought that I would go ahead and throw my two cents into the mix here.

While it is sometimes an inconvenience to have your place of birth in a passport, it is in fact not the US government that forces you to use a passport or identity documents of the country of birth but the country you are actually traveling to. So stating that one is being unfairly treated by the US State Department is a little overboard. At the same time, while it would be convenient to have ones place of birth omitted from the passports information page, it is also understandable that our own government at some times needs that information for confirming identity, after all there are several people all over the country and the world born on the same day with same name, the place of birth is just one factor to tell them apart.

A compromise that I would suggest would be to perhaps re-program the RFID chip that is built in to the current passport covers. As you all might now, the chip is currently locked with a hardware code and can only be read by CPB computers. Saving the discussion about chip usage in general to a later thread, what they could do is to still have your place of birth on the chip but not printed in the actual passport book. This way if the CPB Officers or any other government agency would like to see the info it is accessible for them, but not to any foreign border control. At least in theory, this should work, and would require less of an overhaul of different laws.

[sachinky 465]

I still don't see this as the U.S. government "discriminating" against it's own citizens. While it may be true that naturalized USCs face some sort of "discrimination" while visiting their former country, I don't see how the U.S. government is supposed to be responsible for that.

[v333k 59]

I still don't see this as the U.S. government "discriminating" against it's own citizens. While it may be true that naturalized USCs face some sort of "discrimination" while visiting their former country, I don't see how the U.S. government is supposed to be responsible for that.

I agree. I also don't think the US discriminates against its own citizens, but I guess this whole topic started as an "inconvenience" to some people who wish not to have that in their passport due to discrimination from the former country. However, since the US produced the document, people would prefer to point the finger at them. In my case, I would love not to have that in my future passport, but I guess I can't do anything about it.

[ziia 9]

A compromise that I would suggest would be to perhaps re-program the RFID chip that is built in to the current passport covers. As you all might now, the chip is currently locked with a hardware code and can only be read by CPB computers. Saving the discussion about chip usage in general to a later thread, what they could do is to still have your place of birth on the chip but not printed in the actual passport book. This way if the CPB Officers or any other government agency would like to see the info it is accessible for them, but not to any foreign border control. At least in theory, this should work, and would require less of an overhaul of different laws.

This is a very good idea. It costs money and time but if enough people raise this issue, I'm sure something will be done eventually. They can also opt to have the country of birth of each person in that chip to only be seen solely by the US government agencies and the POE officers at the US border but not by the officers at POE in Romania. I have no problem with that, I am not worried that much about discrimination when I enter this country but other countries overseas .

I heard a lot of stories of mistreatment from the border control in Romania over some friends of mine who are already US Citizens and traveled to Romania in the past. They do not like us at all there- (us, the US citizens who have been born in Romania but left). Hopefully I won't have difficulties with them when I'll go there next time because I'm not paying them any money to be treated fairly lol.

Thank you, Ant. So far I have not heard back from ACLU but if they send me something I will post here. Even if they don't, I am glad the letter has reached them and if not now, later, when they get more complaints about this, they will do something about it.

Edited March 5, 2010 by ziia

[v333k 59]

Just thought that I would go ahead and throw my two cents into the mix here.

While it is sometimes an inconvenience to have your place of birth in a passport, it is in fact not the US government that forces you to use a passport or identity documents of the country of birth but the country you are actually traveling to. So stating that one is being unfairly treated by the US State Department is a little overboard. At the same time, while it would be convenient to have ones place of birth omitted from the passports information page, it is also understandable that our own government at some times needs that information for confirming identity, after all there are several people all over the country and the world born on the same day with same name, the place of birth is just one factor to tell them apart.

A compromise that I would suggest would be to perhaps re-program the RFID chip that is built in to the current passport covers. As you all might now, the chip is currently locked with a hardware code and can only be read by CPB computers. Saving the discussion about chip usage in general to a later thread, what they could do is to still have your place of birth on the chip but not printed in the actual passport book. This way if the CPB Officers or any other government agency would like to see the info it is accessible for them, but not to any foreign border control. At least in theory, this should work, and would require less of an overhaul of different laws.

Oh captain my captain,

I like this idea as well. I think that this information is already available in the RFID chip, it will actually cost the US government less money if they omit typing it in the passports since they have to use less ink on the paper, and this way the US will be able to obtain all your info but it is not available to other countries....

[NickD 202]

We just got back from Colombia to visit my wife's family, I sure didn't have problems neither entering or leaving but my wife sure did. I am a natural born USC, wife is a naturalized citizen of the USA.

Going in as long as that line was, took her a full ten minutes to explain, her place of birth on her US passport, she could not apply for a Colombian passport at the consulate in Chicago because her Colombian ID was already over thirty years old. Was told she had to go to Colombia to renew that first, that she tried to explain to the immigration guy at the POE. It's a catch 22 position they put you in, like you can't get into the country unless you have a Colombian passport, but can't get one until you enter the country to update your Colombian ID. He finally let her in.

Was a mess for us chasing all over Bogota, even though we brought all of her original records with us, they wanted new ones meaning we had to go to a notary, the documents were identical to the ones we brought in, but were a couple of hundred bucks poorer in the process. She was told it would take six months to a year to ger her ID even though all of her papers were in order. Kind of reminded me, of what would happen to you here if you lost your green card.

Leaving Colombia was just as bad for her as they claimed she again needed that Colombian passport to leave the country, again a lot of explaining to do, did show the application for her new ID, thankfully, they let her leave.

We have no intentions of moving to Colombia, just want to visit her family. Not in a position to blame the Colombian government nor the USA government for putting her place of birth on her US passport. But can only say, since they do put her place of birth on her US passport, she is NOT a USC just like me.

[sachinky 465]

Sachinky-Well..why can't we be "stateless", as apposed to having a birth coutnry listed on a passport? Again, we do not choose where we are born, but we can choose where we are naturalized. So should I leave my nationality up to my parents? Heck no! I choose to be in the USA, as an adult..I am not asking for a favour....I am choosing what I believe is a right, as an adult! I am not choosing what I believe was a right as a minor! One can make decisions as an adult, but not as a minor.....I'm just claiming what is my RIGHT as an adult, that's all....

But, Ant, you did ask for permission to become a citizen of the U.S through the process of naturalization. That IS asking for a favor or a privilege which is granted at the discretion of the U.S. government. You could have just as easily been denied too. You were not automatically entitled to it neither could you demand it simply because it is NOT a right. Just like I can't move to France tomorrow and demand to be a French citizen no matter how much I love France or think it is awesome! While your right to a nationality is secured under the U.N. Charter, nowhere is the RIGHT to CHOOSE your nationality guaranteed.

Edited March 7, 2010 by sachinky

[sachinky 465]

We just got back from Colombia to visit my wife's family, I sure didn't have problems neither entering or leaving but my wife sure did. I am a natural born USC, wife is a naturalized citizen of the USA. Going in as long as that line was, took her a full ten minutes to explain, her place of birth on her US passport, she could not apply for a Colombian passport at the consulate in Chicago because her Colombian ID was already over thirty years old. Was told she had to go to Colombia to renew that first, that she tried to explain to the immigration guy at the POE. It's a catch 22 position they put you in, like you can't get into the country unless you have a Colombian passport, but can't get one until you enter the country to update your Colombian ID. He finally let her in. Was a mess for us chasing all over Bogota, even though we brought all of her original records with us, they wanted new ones meaning we had to go to a notary, the documents were identical to the ones we brought in, but were a couple of hundred bucks poorer in the process. She was told it would take six months to a year to ger her ID even though all of her papers were in order. Kind of reminded me, of what would happen to you here if you lost your green card. Leaving Colombia was just as bad for her as they claimed she again needed that Colombian passport to leave the country, again a lot of explaining to do, did show the application for her new ID, thankfully, they let her leave. We have no intentions of moving to Colombia, just want to visit her family. Not in a position to blame the Colombian government nor the USA government for putting her place of birth on her US passport. But can only say, since they do put her place of birth on her US passport, she is NOT a USC just like me.

Sorry to hear about your troubles. But, NickD, she is NOT a USC just like you. Quite obviously. You did nothing on your part. You were born and that was it. She had to go through an extensive process to become one that took years, effort and money. Surely, that IS a difference right there. Now, as a USC if she voices her grievances against the Colombian government for making her jump through extra hoops, that's fine. But to blame the US government or somehow think it is responsible just because they issued her an identity document doesn't make sense to me.

And another point to consider: When you become a USC you renounce all your ties to your former country. To the U.S. government, you're only a USC. But this doesn't mean that your former country gives you up totally either, just because you gave it up. In this case, maybe the Colombian government still feels like it retains some rights over your wife as a former Colombian citizen and can place certain conditions on her entering and leaving the country?

I know plenty of naturalized American citizens (Indians) who visit India often and have NO trouble through immigration. In fact, they seem to get special preference or treatment just because of their US passport. So this would seem to be a problem with certain countries only. I don't see how the U.S. government is responsible for how border officials of another country behave.

[ziia 9]

But to blame the US government or somehow think it is responsible just because they issued her an identity document doesn't make sense to me.

I don't think anyone is blaming the US Government, but kindly asking the US Government certain things be omitted(not be shown) be on the American Passport to ease up our lives when we travel overseas as US Citizens. Since the issue is after all about a US Government issued document, it would make no sense to call the Passport agency or the Government of a different country(the one we've been born in).

And another point to consider: When you become a USC you renounce all your ties to your former country. To the U.S. government, you're only a USC. But this doesn't mean that your former country gives you up totally either, just because you gave it up. In this case, maybe the Colombian government still feels like it retains some rights over your wife as a former Colombian citizen and can place certain conditions on her entering and leaving the country?

The former country has no ownership rights over a person. If a person gives up the citizenship of the former country, then what right has that country over you? None. Still, it doesn't mean the place of birth changes or that the US is not going to show whatever information they choose on a document they issue, independent of what the former country wants.

II don't see how the U.S. government is responsible for how border officials of another country behave.

If a person chooses to travel with that country's passport then i'd agree with you. But if a person uses the US Passport to travel as an US Citizen and people are treated differently because of that, then the blame splits in two: the POE officers of Colombia, Romania etc. and the US. People tend to focus on where the problem begins(US issued doc) and not so much where the problem projects. After all we are citizens of this county, no? Former countries have no say in how the US Government makes the decision to release any US documents for its citizens. You said it yourself, the US doesn't recognize the ties to former countries when you become a citizen and definitely doesn't owe anything to a country that as you say, might "not let go of you".

Edited March 7, 2010 by ziia

[NickD 202]

Semantics is the word, I was looking for, the DOS does not recognized "dual citizenship", but however they do recognize "dual nationalization".

Granted, I am a naturalized USC, because, my parents had sex here, in the long painful and expensive process, my wife of my choice chose to become a USC, applied, met all the requirements, and was granted USC. But not without a stigma.

In like manner, so she could visit her family, we elected to abide by the rules of the Colombian government, and in like manner, are also going through great expense and inconvenience to obtain for her, a Colombian passport.

The only visible indication of her Colombian connection is in her US passport that her country of birth is Colombia, she will neither vote in Colombia nor pay taxes to Colombia, she just wants to visit her family.

Ironically, she visited Colombia before with her US passport with no incident, now it's an incident, could have something to do with the relationship between our governments. This I do not know, all I am saying is this is something that happened to us that is unexpected, wife hasn't lived in Colombia for over thirty years and was just a kid when she left. But if she wants to visit her family, this is what she has to do. I am also considered a part of her family, I don't have to do anything.

We also looked into registering our marriage in Colombia, extremely more complicated due to her Venezuelan divorce, while the USA recognized this divorce, the procedure is to have the supreme court in Colombia review the Venezuelan divorce by a procedure they call "Codigo de Procedimiento civil a.t. 694", just to take a couple of minutes for the judges to review a current copy of her divorce papers to make sure it complies with Colombian law with a price tag of around $3,000.00 US dollars. They do consider her divorce and marriage to me to be legal, but incomplete until this procedure is followed. We are kicking this around, but really only necessary if we plan on living in Colombia. Her other option just to get her passport and ID is to get it in her maiden name. This is the route we are taking at present. Just another unexpected surprise.

My only purpose of posting this is, if you think your spouse gaining their USC is the end of it, it is not. Granted, very country your spouse came from, dependent.

[ziia 9]

Semantics is the word, I was looking for, the DOS does not recognized "dual citizenship", but however they do recognize "dual nationalization".

Granted, I am a naturalized USC, because, my parents had sex here, in the long painful and expensive process, my wife of my choice chose to become a USC, applied, met all the requirements, and was granted USC. But not without a stigma.

In like manner, so she could visit her family, we elected to abide by the rules of the Colombian government, and in like manner, are also going through great expense and inconvenience to obtain for her, a Colombian passport.

The only visible indication of her Colombian connection is in her US passport that her country of birth is Colombia, she will neither vote in Colombia nor pay taxes to Colombia, she just wants to visit her family.

Ironically, she visited Colombia before with her US passport with no incident, now it's an incident, could have something to do with the relationship between our governments. This I do not know, all I am saying is this is something that happened to us that is unexpected, wife hasn't lived in Colombia for over thirty years and was just a kid when she left. But if she wants to visit her family, this is what she has to do. I am also considered a part of her family, I don't have to do anything.

We also looked into registering our marriage in Colombia, extremely more complicated due to her Venezuelan divorce, while the USA recognized this divorce, the procedure is to have the supreme court in Colombia review the Venezuelan divorce by a procedure they call "Codigo de Procedimiento civil a.t. 694", just to take a couple of minutes for the judges to review a current copy of her divorce papers to make sure it complies with Colombian law with a price tag of around $3,000.00 US dollars. They do consider her divorce and marriage to me to be legal, but incomplete until this procedure is followed. We are kicking this around, but really only necessary if we plan on living in Colombia. Her other option just to get her passport and ID is to get it in her maiden name. This is the route we are taking at present. Just another unexpected surprise.

My only purpose of posting this is, if you think your spouse gaining their USC is the end of it, it is not. Granted, very country your spouse came from, dependent.

Wow, I'm really sorry to hear about your wife's problems when visiting Colombia. I hope one day these inconveniences won't cause so much trouble anymore.

Edited March 7, 2010 by ziia

[Sc0tt28 26]

Hi Everyone,

Lol...The previous "stateless" discussion made me think about this further.......

"Can one omit their "place of birth" and/or go "stateless" on a US passport?"

Lol....It sure would save me a lot of travel problems this way......As I don't want my birth country (other country) listed on such....

I know that the "place of birth" can be omitted on a Canadian passport.....(Canada is my former/current country of citizenship)

I have done that, and on my Canadian passport there is a "blank" on it...

No problem with the Canadian side of things...Not sure how they would handle this on the US side......

Can this be done on an American passport?

If that is the case then I'm seriously considering applying in-person for a US passport in the future.....

As well, my Certificate of Naturalization says "Canada" on it as my former country of citizenship...(lol..I INSISTED that they do such...)

So isn't listing any other country on a US passport cause problems too?....lol.....

Or alternatively, can they put "Canada" on my US passport, instead of my country of birth?

Is there any information (online or otherwise) supporting that this "omitting of birth country" can be done?

Would appreciate any thoughts, ideas, suggestions, etc....Thanks...

Ant

P.S. Lol....I don't know why they put "place of birth" on a passport...as one is a citizen of a current country, then what is the relevance of a former country listed? Personally, I think this is some form of discrimination....even though they say it's for identification purposes...yeah right...lol....

After reading all the posts here I just have to say that if I were the immigration officer, you not wanting to let me know you were born in Iran/Iraq/North Korea (which ever country you think prompts discrimination) would make me ask the question "WHY don't you want me to know....what are you hiding?". Has it ever occurred to you that this is why you run into this so called "discrimination"? If I was immigration, I wouldn't care which country you were born in as long as your passport says "United States of America" on it. Trying to hide one's birthplace would make me wonder why.

[ziia 9]

if I were the immigration officer, you not wanting to let me know you were born in Iran/Iraq/North Korea (which ever country you think prompts discrimination) would make me ask the question "WHY don't you want me to know....what are you hiding?".

This is exactly what we call here in America, profiling(fine line to discrimination by the way). As far as I know IT IS FORBIDDEN and there are laws and huge grounds for lawsuits against this kind of "suspicions"(because of color of skin or country of birth). Sure, if profiling would have been ok in US, you'd have a valid point. But as far as I and the law in this country is concerned, you don't. Don't you hear at the news old white ladies get super screened because at the US POE they can't pull over only darker colored man? It's exactly for that reason: lawsuits!

Having the birth place in the US passport helps solely for what another poster pointed out: it eases the process to enter US at the POE for people who might have the same names. It is NOT there for the purpose of "suspicion" on the part of the immigration officer. There is a huge difference between the duties of an immigration officer at the POE and a CIA agent that deals with overseas terrorism. They might work together at some level, so I understand why they would want to keep the country of birth on the US Passport but what I don't understand is why they don't incorporate that in that chip they have on the cover, where they can only see that information and other countries not. Unless there is a mutual understanding between the US gvmt. and other countries gvmts. that we are not aware of, like a FOIA of some sort to ensure they work together on a mutual opened level against international terrorism, then I would see the point. Still, if there's no such act or understanding or it's no longer "valid", then they should remove the country of birth off the page and integrate it solely into the Passport chip to ensure US Citizens that were born overseas, of a smooth entry and equal fair treatment equal to those of any US citizen born on this land, at the POE of any and every country IMHO.

Edited March 8, 2010 by ziia