US Citizenship Claim from Deceased Parent

[Inquisitive One 0]

My father-in-law believes he has a claim to US Citizenship through his deceased mother.

He was born in Mexico on 3/8/1939 .

His mother was born in Texas on 10/8/22 in Rio Grande City, Texas .

She married a Mexican National. They lived in Mexico and US throughout their lives together.

Her son, my father-in-law, was born in Mexico on 3/8/39 and currently resides in Mexico. All of his children including my wife were all born in Mexico.

His mother died in a hospital in Corpus Christi, TX on 10/12/95.

We have her death certificate and social security number. We are in the process of obtaining her birth certificate also.

My father-in-law currently has a US Visitor's Visa.

After the death of his wife in Corpus, his father moved back to Mexico and just recently passed away a couple of years ago at the age of 100.

Is it true that my father-in-law could obtain a US Passport by going to a US Passport Agency and submitting evidence to the above?

What exactly would he need to provide?

Thanks.

[Boiler 45,486]

You would need to know what the rules were back then for passing on Citizenship. I know what they are now but no doubt they have changed since then.

I remember a long time ago somebody mentioned a Lawyer who was the expert on such matter, but I forget the details.

Probably the cheapest solution is to apply for a Passport. If that does not work then you have a more expensive investigation.

[Caryh 5,206]

This is tricky and going to depend on the laws when he was born, and if he has enough evidence. Here's a link to the checklist at the Philippine embassy. You might find a similar document for the embassy in Mexico., but it should help in getting an idea of what type of proof he is going to need.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CCUQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.state.gov%2Fdocuments%2Forganization%2F86757.pdf&ei=wWRFVP_bOdCwyASv1IKYAw&usg=AFQjCNH9Zwknfla-O8hZlHorO0wlaw8Yew&sig2=Yb8OloEpaDLgOkkP6uLwoQ&bvm=bv.77880786,d.aWw

Edited October 20, 2014 by Caryh

[Mark88 183]

His mother was born in Texas on 10/8/22 in Rio Grande City, Texas .

She married a Mexican National. They lived in Mexico and US throughout their lives together.

Much to my knowledge, US citizenship law was quite different back then. I think citizenship for a married woman was almost exclusively based on that of her husband, particularly if they lived in his native land. This means his mother lost her USC once she married a Mexican national.

Edited October 20, 2014 by Mark88

[Caryh 5,206]

Much to my knowledge, US citizenship law was quite different back then. I think citizenship for a married woman was almost exclusively based on that of her husband, particularly if they lived in his native land. This means his mother lost her USC once she married a Mexican national.

It is actually rather difficult to get rid of USA citizenship. And it certainly doesn't happen because someone married a foreign national. As far back as 1952, the supreme court recognized that a USC could have citizenship in two countries (Kawakita v. U.S.). And citizenship is a much higher level of ties to a country than being married to one of it's citizens or living abroad. The issue of date of father in law's birth, has more to do did the right need to be asserted before age 18, or required time period his mother would have need to spend living in the USA prior to the father in law's birth.

[Mark88 183]

And citizenship is a much higher level of ties to a country than being married to one of it's citizens or living abroad.

Still you have to go further back than 1952 in this case. Just for one example, that USC was lost through marriage is here in this article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seoul_City_Sue (read the part on "Nationality").

[Caryh 5,206]

Still you have to go further back than 1952 in this case. Just for one example, that USC was lost through marriage is here in this article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seoul_City_Sue (read the part on "Nationality").

That's pretty interesting. From 1907 to 1922 that was exclusively true. From 1922 to 1936 it was partly true based on the race of the husband or how long they stayed out of the country. Married to an Asian and they still lost citizenship until 1931. The OP's father in law's mother was born in 1922, so unless she was married by age 14 and stayed out of the country long enough, it would not apply to her citizenship. I'm not sure if this was repealed by congress or the courts, but the designation based on race, you would think would not be considered constitutional today.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cable_Act

The Cable Act of 1922 (ch. 411, 42 Stat. 1021, "Married Women’s Independent Nationality Act") was a United States federal law that reversed former immigration laws regarding marriage, also known as the Married Women's Citizenship Act or the Women's Citizenship Act. Previously, a woman lost her U.S citizenship if she married a foreign man, since she assumed the citizenship of her husband—a law that did not apply to men who married foreign women. It repealed sections 3 and 4 of the Expatriation Act of 1907.^[1]

The law is named for Ohio representative John L. Cable, who proposed the legislation.

Former immigration laws prior to 1922 did not make reference to the alien husband's race.^[2] However, The Cable Act of 1922 guaranteed independent female citizenship only to women who were married to "alien eligible to naturalization".^[3] At the time of the law's passage, Asian aliens were not considered to be racially eligible for U.S. citizenship.^[4][5] As such, the Cable Act only partially reversed previous policies, allowing women to retain their U.S. citizenship after marrying a foreigner who was not Asian. Thus, even after the Cable Act become effective, any woman who married an Asian alien lost her U.S. citizenship, just as she would have under the previous law.

[NigeriaorBust 4,087]

It appears you father lost his claim to citisenship via the 1940 act which required someone with a birth claim to have resided in the US doe 5 years between the ages of 13 and 21 If he did not do that then he lost his claim and no following acts would have restored claims lost via non residence.

[Inquisitive One 0]

It appears you father lost his claim to citisenship via the 1940 act which required someone with a birth claim to have resided in the US doe 5 years between the ages of 13 and 21 If he did not do that then he lost his claim and no following acts would have restored claims lost via non residence.

Are you sure about that. What you are referring to is the "retention requirement" which I believe was eliminated with retroactive effect in 1994. Immigration and Nationality Technical Corrections Act of 1994

[Mark88 183]

Probaly still the best thing is taking the mothers birth certificate and try to apply for a passport. Let DOS sort it out

[Inquisitive One 0]

I found this article useful in this case.

http://www.avvo.com/legal-guides/ugc/retroactive-citizenship-laws-in-the-united-states

[Caryh 5,206]

It appears you father lost his claim to citisenship via the 1940 act which required someone with a birth claim to have resided in the US doe 5 years between the ages of 13 and 21 If he did not do that then he lost his claim and no following acts would have restored claims lost via non residence.

Do you have a link or at least the name of the act? 1940 act is only bringing up hits on an investment and broker act.

[jxn 86]

Probably still the best thing is taking the mothers birth certificate and try to apply for a passport. Let DOS sort it out

I'm curious if the man in question applies for a passport and gets rejected if it would affect his visitor's visa or hurt his chances of getting a new visa afterwards.

[Inquisitive One 0]

I'm curious if the man in question applies for a passport and gets rejected if it would affect his visitor's visa or hurt his chances of getting a new visa afterwards.

I think it would only hurt his visa if they thought he had intention to immigrate during the trip into the US to go to the Passport Agency. Crossing the border with intent to immigrate on a non-immigrant visa can get you in trouble. But that wouldn't be the case here. The guy is over 70 years old with multiple residences in Mexico and still working as a successful accountant there. Even if he got his US Passport I'm pretty sure he would live out the rest of his life in Mexico. The only benefit I really see in him getting his US Passport would be less hassle coming across the border to visit family in the US and being able to buy a Medicare Policy (although it wouldn't be premium free). I guess he could also invest his money in the US easier as well.

[jxn 86]

I think it would only hurt his visa if they thought he had intention to immigrate during the trip into the US to go to the Passport Agency. Crossing the border with intent to immigrate on a non-immigrant visa can get you in trouble. But that wouldn't be the case here. The guy is over 70 years old with multiple residences in Mexico and still working as a successful accountant there. Even if he got his US Passport I'm pretty sure he would live out the rest of his life in Mexico. The only benefit I really see in him getting his US Passport would be less hassle coming across the border to visit family in the US and being able to buy a Medicare Policy (although it wouldn't be premium free). I guess he could also invest his money in the US easier as well.

I meant more along the lines of it would be seen as fraud. Although I understand the nature of applying for a passport as the quickest way to see if you indeed can claim citizenship, I wonder if a rejection would have ramifications. Also, I wonder how likely it is the claim could be successfully made but that a regular passport application would get rejectedis there a way to do it outside of just applying? Curious to learn, and best of luck if it turns out he is eligible, OP.