Law Question

[adeelsiddiqui]

Is it possible for an American (born and raised) to be deported out of the country?

If so, where the heck would they deport them?

[SWTsig]

if it's gotten to that point i'd say you're f*kt regardless

[Galaksy]

Originally Posted by adeelsiddiqui Is it possible for an American (born and raised) to be deported out of the country? If so, where the heck would they deport them?

Deported? I dont think so lol

Isolated, yeah

[fmullegun]

Originally Posted by adeelsiddiqui Is it possible for an American (born and raised) to be deported out of the country? If so, where the heck would they deport them?

only a kid and they would be deported because of their parents.

[SageHare6]

Only if your last name is MADOFF.

theSAGE

[Dei]

I think the appropriate term is "exiled."

[wreck]

Originally Posted by fmullegun only a kid and they would be deported because of their parents.

even so they cant deport the kid. of course the kid would have to leave "voluntarily" since he or she may not have anywhere to live. but he wont be forced out of the country

[adeelsiddiqui]

Originally Posted by Dei I think the appropriate term is "exiled."

Well i was reading about how some guy that was born and raised in Michigan was deported to Russia (home of his parents)

Apparently the Government just didn't accept his birth certificate in court and said he wasn't American.

I mean that issue got resolved, but that is illegal to do right?

Also, what happens when a person gets exiled? Do they get to choose where they get exiled to? What if no one wants to take them in?

I know in Pakistan for example the former leaders "exile" away in Saudi Arabia...

[adeelsiddiqui]

Originally Posted by wreck even so they cant deport the kid. of course the kid would have to leave "voluntarily" since he or she may not have anywhere to live. but he wont be forced out of the country

Im thinking the only options the child has is to leave with the parent or to go into a foster home.

[James Gabriel]

I think if you commited crime in another country and sought refuge back in America, you will be deported back to that country so you could face charges under their own law.

[fmp087]

The U.S. government can deport whoever they choose, whether they were born in the U.S. or not. But technically, an American-born U.S. citizen can not be deported, unless his/her parents are of foreign decent (live in another country), and is unable to be taken care of by another family member.

[JuanValdez]

Well, you could deport after the citizen formally renounced citizenship -- actually, no, because you can only renounce on foreign soil. So, no, except for children of illegals, perhaps, those it probably is not considered a deportation.

If you could do it, and assuming they had no other citizenship, no country would accept them, so they'd rot in detention centers forever, like all the Cubans we have that we can't deport back to Cuba.

[YallMean]

Citizen, no, even though theoretically yes.

Has he given up his citizenship after his birth?

Does he have a valid US passport? If not, does have a birth certificate? If still not, can he prove he was born in the US?

[Bullard4Life]

Originally Posted by YallMean Citizen, no, even though theoretically yes. Has he given up his citizenship after his birth? Does he have a valid US passport? If not, does have a birth certificate? If still not, can he prove he was born in the US?

Um, if he can verify citizenship, theoretically no too, at least according to the Supreme Court. Trop v. Dulles was the case in which the Warren Court famously coined the term "evolving standards of decency" and ruled that such a punishment would violate the 8th Amendment.

Trop v. Dulles, 356 U.S. 86 (1958), was a federal court case in the United States that was filed in 1955, and finally decided by the Supreme Court in 1958. The Supreme Court decided, 5-4, that it was unconstitutional for the government to cancel the citizenship of a U.S. citizen as a punishment. The ruling's reference to "evolving standards of decency" is frequently cited precedent in the court's interpretation of the Eighth Amendment's prohibition on "cruel and unusual punishment."

[YallMean]

Originally Posted by Bullard4Life Um, if he can verify citizenship, theoretically no too, at least according to the Supreme Court. Trop v. Dulles was the case in which the Warren Court famously coined the term "evolving standards of decency" and ruled that such a punishment would violate the 8th Amendment. Trop v. Dulles, 356 U.S. 86 (1958), was a federal court case in the United States that was filed in 1955, and finally decided by the Supreme Court in 1958. The Supreme Court decided, 5-4, that it was unconstitutional for the government to cancel the citizenship of a U.S. citizen as a punishment. The ruling's reference to "evolving standards of decency" is frequently cited precedent in the court's interpretation of the Eighth Amendment's prohibition on "cruel and unusual punishment."

Thanks for the quick pull up.
Just a clarification: I was thinking along the line "The words of the Eighth Amendment are not precise and their scope is not static; the Amendment must draw its meaning from the evolving standards of decency that mark the progress of maturing society. " (Per Chief Justice with three Justices concurring and one Justice concurring in result.) It wouldn't shock me some years from now, Congress passes an Act to cancel US born terrorist's US citizenship.

But I don't realize as of right now, canceling a person's US citizenship is not possible under the current ruling of the law. That's why I said no in the first place.

[YallMean]

Originally Posted by YallMean But I do realize as of right now, canceling a person's US citizenship is not possible under the current ruling of the law. That's why I said no in the first place.

Err, no edit.