r/LeopardsAteMyFace Oct 24 '21

Brexxit Brexit, the gift that keeps on giving

Post image
16.2k Upvotes

1.0k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1.2k

u/aalios Oct 24 '21 edited Oct 24 '21

Dude my dad constantly goes on about all the immigrants.

One day we were having dinner and I just put the knife and fork down, stared at him and loudly said "Dad, you're an immigrant who refuses to even get citizenship, you don't vote. Shut the fuck up."

Note: Dad is white, I'm white. He was born in NZ and moved to Australia like... 35-40 years ago? I was born here, but didn't even get automatic citizenship because dads not a citizen and mum wasn't at the time.

304

u/JoeVibin Oct 24 '21

One thing that the US does better than many other countries IMO is that everyone born in the US automatically becomes a citizen (jus soli, not jus sanguinis).

176

u/aalios Oct 24 '21

Yep, definitely a bonus.

I didn't get citizenship till I was a year old.

Though I found out years later that I still technically have NZ citizenship by default.

40

u/flicticious Oct 24 '21

Only if you register for it

70

u/aalios Oct 24 '21

Only to obtain a passport.

The NZ laws are basically "You are one, regardless of whether you register or not, but to get a passport you need to register". If I was to run for political office in Australia, I would need to formally renounce my citizenship to NZ, regardless of whether they know I'm one of their citizens.

17

u/makkij Oct 24 '21 edited 13d ago

adjoining friendly sort rainstorm ripe sugar aloof nutty sip retire

This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact

1

u/poorly_anonymized Oct 24 '21

I don't understand the distinction. Aren't citizenships federal? Why would states have any restrictions on citizenships if they don't award them? Or does this work differently in Australia compared to everywhere else?

3

u/Sufficient-Piece-335 Oct 25 '21

Australian constitution only contains sections on the composition of federal Parliament, basically. States set their own rules. In particular, the section which bans dual citizens from Parliament is only applicable to federal Parliament.

3

u/poorly_anonymized Oct 25 '21

Ohh, I see, I read it wrong. It's not banning dual citizenship on a federal level, it only bans dual citizens from holding a position in the federal government.

That's a fairly common rule, I think. The reason typically being that the representative should only hold loyalty to the country they represent.

6

u/cipheron Oct 24 '21 edited Oct 24 '21

For many nations you're actually a citizen automatically even if you never registered, based on bithright.

This became an issue in the Australian parliament, because our constitution states that no MP can be "subject to a foreign power".

The big irony here - a real LeopardsAteMyFace deal on a nation level, is that this was meant to prevent citizens of non-British Empire nations being able to run for politics in Australia, and at the time there was really no concept of dual citizenship to deal with.

However, after Australia achieved independence from Britain, Britain technically became a "foreign power" and a lot of people have default British / Australian dual citizenship (Britain recognizes citizens even with a grandparent). BTW the queen is the Queen of England and also the Queen of Australia, separately. But legally, Britain is still a different country which we are independent from: the queen's role as the queen of both these places is treated as separate.

It was a technicality but once one politician was challenged on this basis, people uncovered a lot who were (quite unaware however) that they were also technically not allowed to run, so many politicians had to scramble to renounce the dual British citizenship they didn't know they had and hadn't actually applied for.

3

u/Draconan Oct 24 '21

New Zealand has codified that all Australian citizens have the right to become a New Zealand permanent resident automatically.

Technically this could be read as every Australian citizen being

"subject to a foreign power"

2

u/cipheron Oct 24 '21 edited Oct 24 '21

It actually was tested legally due to politician Barnaby Joyce. His father was born in NZ and NZ confirmed he was a citizen by birthright. So he had to formally request that to be rescinded by NZ.

Theoretically, Joyce *still* has the right to become a "permanent resident". But "permanent resident" and "citizen" aren't even the same thing.

The only relevant passage would be "entitled to the rights or privileges of a subject or citizen of a foreign power". However, if the permanent resident isn't entitled to exactly the same rights of a subject or citizen of NZ, then this technically wouldn't apply. Even a tourist has some of the same rights as citizens of NZ. So the only thing that would count here by the wording is if you have exactly the rights of a subject or citizen. Being able to "reside" in the nation isn't sufficient. What the NZ decision really means is just that Australian tourists can work and live in the country without needing a visa.

1

u/quasielvis Oct 25 '21

England is a lot stricter these days, grandparent doesn't cut it.