Citizenship of baby born aboard Irish vessel

Tabnabs

Does anyone know if the baby born on the LE Niamh can claim Irish citizenship, as Niamh is an Irish registered vessel?

http://www.rte.ie/news/2015/0721/716321-le-niamh-mediterranean/

Carawaystick

I presume not, as her parents were not legally resident in Ireland for 4 years before her birth, nor are EU citizens

Tabnabs

But a person born in Irish sea or air space to a non-national on a foreign ship or in a foreign aircraft can? Seems at odds.

Pro Hoc Vice

Tabnabs wrote: »

But a person born in Irish sea or air space to a non-national on a foreign ship or in a foreign aircraft can? Seems at odds.

Can you quote the legislation that does that. It is important to remember that citizenship changed in 2004.

http://www.inis.gov.ie/en/INIS/consolidationINCA.pdf/Files/consolidationINCA.pdf

coylemj

Tabnabs wrote: »

But a person born in Irish sea or air space to a non-national on a foreign ship or in a foreign aircraft can? Seems at odds.

So if a baby is born on an Air India flight from Miami to Delhi and it just happens to be passing over Ireland at the time, that baby can claim Irish citizenship? Don't think so.

flyingsnail

Given that it does not apply to the island of Ireland I doubt it applys to an Irish Naval vessel.

Source - http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/moving_country/irish_citizenship/irish_citizenship_through_birth_or_descent.html

Under the provisions of the Irish Nationality and Citizenship Act 2004, children born of other foreign national parents in the island of Ireland on or after 1 January 2005 are not automatically entitled to Irish citizenship. These parents must prove that they have a genuine link to Ireland. This will be evidenced by their having 3 out of the previous 4 years reckonable residence in the island of Ireland immediately before the birth of the child. On proof of a genuine link to Ireland their child will be entitled to Irish citizenship and can apply for a certificate of nationality -

billy few mates

Speaking from slightly related experience I would imagine the port of landing might be used as the 'place of birth' for legal purposes.
I worked for an airline some years ago and we had a couple of incidents where a passenger was DOA. I remember one of the doctors telling me that the final destination was the one recorded as place of death even if the passenger had been confirmed dead five minutes after take off from New York, Mumbai air where ever.
I also think they could have absolutely guaranteed Irish citizenship if they had called the baby 'Niamh' after the ship. No Irish government would ever disown or deport a child called Niamh....

mahoganygas

Somebody once told me a story (may not be true) about an American politician travelling on a flight to Canada with his wife.

The wife started going into labour so the politician begged the pilot to turn the flight around and land in America. His thinking was that if the child was born in the air and then arrived at destination in Canada, then the child could never be US president. The rules for presidency mean you must be born on American soil.

Talk about having high expectations for your kid!

Tabnabs

Pro Hoc Vice wrote: »

Can you quote the legislation that does that. It is important to remember that citizenship changed in 2004.

http://www.inis.gov.ie/en/INIS/consolidationINCA.pdf/Files/consolidationINCA.pdf

Claiming Irish citizenship through special declaration

Some people may only claim Irish citizenship by making a declaration on a special form. They include:

A person born on the island of Ireland to a foreign national who at the time of that person's birth was entitled to diplomatic immunity within the State (for example, a foreign ambassador)
A person born in Irish sea or air space to a foreign national on a foreign ship or in a foreign aircraft
A person born on the island of Ireland who has made a declaration of alienage on form 13 (pdf) under Section 21 of the Irish Nationality and Citizenship Act 1956 (i.e. a person who has declared that he or she is no longer an Irish citizen). Such a person can resume Irish citizenship by making a declaration using form 1 (pdf).

These forms are available from the Irish Naturalisation and Immigration Service or your nearest Irish embassy or consular office.

http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/moving_country/irish_citizenship/irish_citizenship_through_birth_or_descent.html#l23f7d

billy few mates

Welcome to Ireland Niamh...

ohnonotgmail

Tabnabs wrote: »

http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/moving_country/irish_citizenship/irish_citizenship_through_birth_or_descent.html#l23f7d

except the part in bold doesnt apply to the child. They were not born in Irish sea or air space. and i cant find anywhere in the 2004 act where it actually says that.

THe act does say

A person born in an Irish ship or an Irish aircra
ft wherever it may be is deemed to be born in
the island of Ireland

but this doesnt really help the child as the usual restrictions on the citizenship of the parents would still apply.

Tabnabs

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

except the part in bold doesnt apply to the child. They were not born in Irish sea or air space. and i cant find anywhere in the 2004 act where it actually says that.

THe act does say



but this doesnt really help the child as the usual restrictions on the citizenship of the parents would still apply.

So the answer to the OP is therefore yes, the child could claim Irish citizenship?

ohnonotgmail

Tabnabs wrote: »

So the answer to the OP is therefore yes, the child could claim Irish citizenship?

quite the opposite. Even though the child is officially born on Irish soil it still has to satisfy the other requirements re the child's parents having a link to Ireland.

Pro Hoc Vice

Tabnabs wrote: »

http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/moving_country/irish_citizenship/irish_citizenship_through_birth_or_descent.html#l23f7d

I don't think that is saying what you think it is saying. A person who either parent is a citizen no matter where born is a citizen, a person who neither parent is a citizen but who at least one parent is legally resident in Ireland for 3 of previous 4 years is a citizen, if born in Ireland. If a child of such a non national is born on a Irish aircraft or boat no matter where in the world could claim citizenship, as could such a person born in territorial water or air on a non Irish craft. What you quote does not give a non national child of non national parents any extra rights.

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

ohnonotgmail

Fred Swanson wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

where is that covered in the citizenship act?

Pro Hoc Vice

Fred Swanson wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Very true, but it is in practice very difficult to prove a child is stateless. It has happened in recent times.

Victor

Place of birth does not equal citizenship, but has other legal implications, e.g. who issues the birth certificate.

billy few mates wrote: »

I worked for an airline some years ago and we had a couple of incidents where a passenger was DOA. I remember one of the doctors telling me that the final destination

Nit-picking, but surely it would be the next place of landing, e.g. if a flight travels Dublin-London-Amsterdam and someone dies 5 minutes out from Dublin, the death would be recorded in London, not Amsterdam.

I also think they could have absolutely guaranteed Irish citizenship if they had called the baby 'Niamh' after the ship. No Irish government would ever disown or deport a child called Niamh....

Pure sentimentality.

mahoganygas wrote: »

Somebody once told me a story (may not be true) about an American politician travelling on a flight to Canada with his wife.

The wife started going into labour so the politician begged the pilot to turn the flight around and land in America. His thinking was that if the child was born in the air and then arrived at destination in Canada, then the child could never be US president. The rules for presidency mean you must be born on American soil.

Talk about having high expectations for your kid!

Dealt with by 'The West Wing'. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donna_Moss

The requirement doesn't mention soil. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural-born-citizen_clause

él statutorio

mahoganygas wrote: »

Somebody once told me a story (may not be true) about an American politician travelling on a flight to Canada with his wife.

The wife started going into labour so the politician begged the pilot to turn the flight around and land in America. His thinking was that if the child was born in the air and then arrived at destination in Canada, then the child could never be US president. The rules for presidency mean you must be born on American soil.

Talk about having high expectations for your kid!

Not true.

Where does that leave Ted Cruz, born in Canada? Presidential candidate.

My daughter (born in Ireland to an American Mother and Irish father) would be eligible to stand for president (assuming we stay living in the US).

bisounours

mahoganygas wrote: »

The rules for presidency mean you must be born on American soil.

"natural-born citizen."

Debated often as to whether that means born in the U.S (or US territory) or "born American" i.e., of American descent (both or one parent but born abroad)

Effectively it was to rule out naturalised persons who then may have a torn affiliation from their country of origin and their new country once in office.

One can argue "born by accident in the US whilst parents were on holiday" or born and lived abroad their whole lives (with American parents) would probably call that affiliation into question as well...

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

coylemj

Fred Swanson wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Surely it's a mater of interpreting the 'natural-born citizen' clause in the Constitution which would fall to the federal courts and ultimately the Supreme Court?

By what mechanism or process do you imagine the Congress would have a role?

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

coylemj

Fred Swanson wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Would that involve impeachment based on lack of the necessary qualification or would the Congress initiate a case in the federal courts seeking a declaration that the putative president was not qualified to hold the office?

Before it ever came to such a challenge, could officials in several states refuse to accept a nomination paper from a prospective presidential candidate based on the fact that in the opinion of said official(s) that he/she was not a 'natural-born citizen'. Do state officials have that right?

Peregrinus

coylemj wrote: »

Surely it's a mater of interpreting the 'natural-born citizen' clause in the Constitution which would fall to the federal courts and ultimately the Supreme Court?

By what mechanism or process do you imagine the Congress would have a role?

Under the US Constitution it's up to the President of the Senate (and, in some circumstances, the Senate itself) to certify the outcome of the presidential electoral process. That means that, if the issue ever arises, the President of the Senate may have to form a view as to whether the apparently successful candidate is a natural-born citizen (or meets any other qualifying requirement, e.g is 35 years old, or has lived in the US for at least 14 years).

Presumably, if the candidate with the most electoral votes is ruled out for not being a natural-born citizen, he will immediately pop across the road and ask the Supreme Court to set aside the President of the Senate's finding, and declare him the winner.

As this has never happened, we don't know what attitude the Supreme Court would take. But there's a view among at least some academics that the court would refuse to consider the matter because the Constitution provides explicitly for the presidential electoral process to be regulated by Congress, and that makes it a non-justiciable political question. It's established that there is a class of such questions, including whether the US is at war with another state, or whether an impeachment in the Senate has been properly conducted. The Supreme Court will not rule on these matters.

Peregrinus

coylemj wrote: »

Would that involve impeachment based on lack of the necessary qualification or would the Congress initiate a case in the federal courts seeking a declaration that the putative president was not qualified to hold the office?

Neither. Congressional officials (specifically, the President of the Senate) would refuse to certify the vote from the electoral college. It would then be for the aggrieved candidate to bring court proceedings seeking to compel the certification of his election. (As pointed out in the post above, there is doubt about whether he could succeed.)

If the candidate was certified elected, but it was later alleged that he had been born in, oh, let's say, Kenya and wasn't a natural-born citizen, it's doubtful (for the reasons pointed out in the post above) that anyone could get the Supreme Court to rule that he was disqualified from office. They'd say this was a matter for Congress.

coylemj wrote: »

Before it ever came to such a challenge, could officials in several states refuse to accept a nomination paper from a prospective presidential candidate based on the fact that in the opinion of said official(s) that he/she was not a 'natural-born citizen'. Do state officials have that right?

Good question, and I'm not sure of the answer. My gut feeling is that they don't. You don't have meet any qualifications to be nominated; just to be elected. It's not the business of the state officials to say who Congress can and can not deem to have the requisite qualifications.

Plus, there's the theoretical possibility that, even if you don't meet the qualifications now, you could do so by the date the electoral college does its stuff. Surprisingly, it is possible (if rare) for someone who is not a "natural-born citizen" of the United States to become one. Obviously, the early presidents, all born before 1776, were considered to be natural-born US citizens even though they weren't US citizens at birth (because there was no US). In modern times this can only happen if the US annexes new territory. E.g. Hawaiians born before 1898 all became "natural-born citizens" of the US when the US annexed Hawaii. And who's to say that, between the date of nomination and the date of election, the US is not going to annex Kenya?

John McCain, in fact, was born in the Panama Canal Zone at a time when this did not confer citizenship, but when he was a year old US law was changed to confer US citizenship retroactively on a class of people born in the Canal Zone (including him). Had he won the 2008 election, we might finally have an authoritative decision on this point but, of course, he lost. I'm pretty sure he had no difficulty getting his nomination papers accepted in every state.

coylemj

Peregrinus wrote: »

Under the US Constitution it's up to the President of the Senate (and, in some circumstances, the Senate itself) to certify the outcome of the presidential electoral process.

So it was ironic that in December 2000 that person was none other than Al Gore! I expect that in fact the process of certifying George W. Bush's 'victory' in the November election fell to the President pro-tem i.e. the majority leader at the time.

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.