Bundestag approves new Citizenship Law

On Friday, January 19, 2024, the German parliament passed a new law that will make it easier to become a German citizen. It also will allow Germans to hold multiple citizenships without applying for the Beibehatungsgenehmigung.

The new law is expected to go into effect in April or May.

The Swiss Have a Fever for More Cowbell, Less Busybody

I am not sure what would be more tiring; putting every political decision to public referendum or constantly knowing what is better for others. Fortunately a Dutch woman living in Switzerland received a healthy dose of both when her petition for citizenship was denied because of the votes of her neighbors.
Switzerland is unique in many ways and one that has always piqued my interest is the fact that it is a nearly pure democracy. In general this means that every public decision is put to a popular vote, from innocuous decisions like the color of the trash bin to more serious considerations as to who is granted citizenship.
Twice Nancy Holten petitioned for citizenship and the decision was left to her neighbors. Twice the people of Gipf-Oberfrick rejected her petition, with 144 voters out of 206 choosing NO.
Mrs. Holten who describes herself as a freelance journalist, model, activist, and drama student has busied herself attacking Swiss institutions she believed wrong. She campaigned against the iconic cowbells hung from Alpine cow necks, citing the heavy weight and discomfort the cows must experience. It is not clear if anyone explained to her the legitimate and practical reasons for such bells but regardless her campaigning didn't end there. Nancy Holten decried other Swiss traditions like pig races and especially hunting. She formally complained against the noise caused by church bells, once again either ignoring or ignorant as to their practical function. Her passion for veganism led her to crusade against cheese, embarrassing enough for a Dutchwoman, but too much for her Alpine neighbors to take.

Those rejecting her petition pointed out that she disrespects Swiss traditions and even their way of life. Her neighbors are 'fed up' with the sanctimony and don't feel that she is 'accepting what is Swiss.'
This leads me to a very important point, one especially topical given the tumultuous landscape of US immigration policy. Citizenship, among other things, is a commingling of values. A veritable fondue where the immigrant proudly adds to the richness and variety of the whole but acknowledges the importance and values of the nation. Examining and sometimes even challenging these ideas may be necessary but attacking and browbeating your neighbors to the point of extreme annoyance is a very tone deaf choice.

Senate Votes 68-32 in Favor of Immigration Reform Bill

Retrieved from: commons.wikimedia.org

On Thursday, the U.S. Senate approved the milestone immigration reform bill that we have previously covered in several blog posts. Immigration has taken the helm as one of the major focuses of President’s Obama’s second term. The nearly 1,200 page bill plans to create a path of citizenship for millions of undocumented U.S. residents and to tighten border security with Mexico.

The Senate voted 68-32 in favor of the bill drafted by four Democrats and four Republicans, known as the “Gang of Eight”. While they had hoped to receive 70 votes for their bill, they believe that even 68 votes should provide a strong mandate for the House to act on the bill.

A total of fourteen Republicans voted in favor of the bill, joining a caucus of Democrats with Vice President Joe Biden acting as head of the Senate during the vote, using his constitutional right to do so.

Obama praised the Senate decision, calling it a “critical step” towards fixing what he believes is a broken immigration system.

Despite fourteen Republicans voting in favor of the bill, most conservatives still remain opposed to it. Obama has urged Americans to contact their House representatives and tell them to vote in favor of the bill.

The bill will now go on the Republican-controlled House of Representatives, who will act on it next month. We will keep you posted on the developments.

Author: Sean Foley Legal Trainee Bridgehouse Law Charlotte

Supreme Court Rules against Requiring Voters to Prove Citizenship

Retrieved from: commons.wikimedia.org

In prior blog posts, we have written about Arizona immigration laws being struck down by the Supreme Court. On Monday, the Supreme Court ruled once again against Arizona, claiming the state may not require proof of citizenship from people seeking to vote in federal elections.

Prior to the ruling, Arizona required people to provide such documentation in order to be able to vote. This law was implemented in 2004 in response to the high numbers of illegal immigrants that come to Arizona. According to lawyers involved in this case, tens of thousands of Arizonans have been denied the right to vote because they didn’t provide proof of citizenship.

In the ruling, Justice Antonin Scalia stated that a federal law requiring states to “accept and use” a federal form displaces the Arizona state law. This federal law allows voters to fill out a form that includes the question, “Are you a citizen of the United States?” Voters must check a box for yes or no, and they must sign this form, swearing their answer is the truth under the penalty of perjury.

Arizona officials argued that they do accept and use the form, but that they require additional information as well. Justice Scalia emphasized the meaning of the term “accept and use”, stating that in context the term means that the federal form is to be accepted as being sufficient.

The Justices inquired that Arizona had options if they wanted to change the federal form, such as asking the Election Assistance Committee to make a change. Arizona had already done this in 2005 and their request was rejected. However, Arizona is able to attempt to ask again.

Author: Sean Foley, Legal Trainee, Bridgehouse Law Charlotte