Opinion Archive

What to Make of Dual Citizenship

September 24, 2008

People wear their national origin on their sleeve as an intrinsic part of their identity - an appendage to their ego. In fact, the nation state is so ubiquitous that it is no longer seen as a human construct. Despite its parochial European origins (circa 1648, Treaty of Westphalia), nationality is the cornerstone of human relations. This sense of belonging begets "nationalism", defined as "a sense of national consciousness exalting one nation above all others and placing primary emphasis on promotion of its culture and interests as opposed to those of other nations". Think about that: "one nation above all others". Nationalism is surely the last socially acceptable redoubt of the chauvinist.

Nationality is, therefore, a jealous master by nature. But it turns out that there are those who hold two (or more) nationalities. In fact, the peculiar historical relationship between Mexico and the US makes our two countries "ground zero" for dual citizenship issues. You see, countries in our hemisphere, being the product of immigration, grant citizenship based on jus soli, or "right of soil", which is different from jus sanguinis, the "right of blood" that determines national belonging in Europe.

The US Constitution, in its 14th Amendment (1868), states: "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside." The term "jurisdiction" thus only excludes people who are in the country with diplomatic immunity (and, previously, some Native American tribes). So, out of the 28 million Mexicans and Mexican-Americans in the US, a large majority has US citizenship simply by virtue of having been born on American soil. To the chagrin of nativists, the Mexican-American community has lately grown more through local births than through immigration, despite record numbers of immigrants.

Fringe groups in Congress consistently introduce legislation to stop what Republican Congressman Virgil Goode calls the "anchor baby situation" by conditioning US citizenship to the immigration status of the parents. "Anchor babies" and "birth tourism" (reportedly popular among upper-class Asians) refer to undocumented immigrants and other non-residents/non-citizens having children in the US. These American citizens can then petition to bring their parents as legal residents under the family reunification clause of US immigration law. Legislation that conditions US citizenship hasn't gotten very far, however, thanks to both constitutional and political considerations.

Regarding dual nationality, the US State Department specifically recognizes that there are legitimate circumstances under which a person can be a citizen of more than one country. Its website states "U.S. law does not mention dual nationality or require a person to choose one citizenship or another. Also, a person who is automatically granted another citizenship does not risk losing U.S. citizenship."

So, historically, the problem with having both Mexican and American citizenship has been on the Mexican side. Up until 1998, Mexicans were not allowed to have dual citizenship (many underdeveloped countries are standoffish about their nationality due to self-esteem issues). Mexico used to require its citizens to specifically abjure their other nationality when affirming Mexican citizenship, forcing people to choose.

Fortunately, those days are over. Belonging to two (or more) friendly countries opens up many possibilities for both the individual and the nations they serve. Even in the case of two countries that are antagonists, sharing the loyalty of one of its citizens can create much-needed bridges of communication. This has been the case with Iranian scholars who also have US citizenship and the valuable advice they give to further diplomatic solutions to international disputes.

Here in North America, a stronger, more democratically consolidated Mexico is in the US national interest. So, an argument can be made that what is good for Mexico is good for the US. Under these circumstances, dual US-Mexican citizenship opens up a number of possibilities that can benefit both countries. For example, this column has suggested the use of Mexican-American investigators and law enforcement professionals to help with our overwhelming crime problems, many of which are international in origin. In business, dual citizenship can mean that people can be judged on their merits and not the color of their passports, freeing up talent.

Of course, dual citizenship brings obligations, as well as opportunities. But in a bi-national region that is as tightly bound together as the US, Mexico, and their huge border area, we have been remiss in exploring the possibilities that dual nationals offer. Most of the time, our governments overlook this precious human resource. As our problems grow and our relationship becomes more complex, we would be foolish to fail to recruit our dual citizens to be a pivotal part of a solution to our bi-national challenges.

For the latest thought-provoking article by Agustin Barrios Gomez please go to our Opinion Column page

Return to top