White House Gives Chilly Reception to Lieberman’s Citizenship-Stripping Bill
EmailWhite House press secretary Robert Gibbs today indicated no one in the White House supports the legislation introduced today by Sens. Joe Lieberman, I-Conn., that would give the State Department the power to revoke the citizenship of American terrorism suspects.
“I have not heard anybody inside the administration that's been supportive of that idea,” Gibbs said.
Gibbs said he had “not heard large enumerations on why, except that I don't think anybody would find that to be such an effective way.”
Lieberman offered the legislation today along with Sen. Scott Brown, R-Mass., and Reps. Jason Altmire, D-Penn., and Charlie Dent, R-Penn, which would add to the existing federal statute, 8 U.S.C. § 1481, which identifies seven categories of actions for which U.S. citizens lose their citizenship. The legislation, called the Terrorist Expatriation Act, would authorize the State Department to revoke the citizenship of any U.S. national who provides material support or resources to a Foreign Terrorist Organization or who engages in or supports hostilities against the United States or its allies.
In a speech, Lieberman said that Times Square suspect Faisal Shahzad “is just the latest in a growing and accelerating line of cases where U.S. Citizens have supported or fought for al-Qaeda or affiliated terrorist organizations against the United States… With increasing frequency, U.S. Citizens like Nidal Hassan, Abdul Hakim Muhammad, or Faisal Shahzad, who are inspired or recruited by violent Islamist ideology plan and execute attacks right here in the United States.”
Lieberman, the chairman of the Senate Homeland Security Committee said that it “has become a strategy of al-Qaeda and other Islamist terrorist groups over the past couple of years to recruit U.S. citizens who can train overseas and then use their American passports to re-enter the U.S. for the purposes of planning and carrying out attacks against us. …The legislation we are introducing today will help take that ability away from the terrorists. For example, if a U.S. citizen travels to Somalia to train with and fight for al-Shabaab – as more than 20 young men have done over the past several years – the State Department will now have the authority to revoke their citizenship so that they cannot return here to carry out an attack. If, in some way, they do, and are then captured, they will not enjoy the rights and privileges of American citizenship in the legal proceedings against them.”
John Bellinger, a legal adviser to the Secretary of State during the Bush administration, told the Huffington Post’s Sam Stein that the Lieberman bill “sounds like a draconian solution. I assume the Senate has thought through the constitutional issues but I would want to see what the standards are for stripping someone of their citizenship and what opportunities they would have for notice and to challenge the decision… It certainly seems like a far-reaching step."
The citizenship of American citizens can be legally taken away from any adult who, among other actions, obtains naturalization in a foreign state, makes a formal declaration of allegiance to a foreign state, serves in the armed forces of a foreign state if engaged in hostilities against the United States, makes a formal renunciation of nationality before a diplomatic or consular officer of the US in a foreign state, or commits any act of treason.
The summary of Lieberman’s bill can be read HERE and the legislation can be read HERE.
-jpt
Mitt Romney's Full Speech at CPAC 2012 
Romney Makes His Case to Conservatives at CPAC
just a I thought my comment would not be posted lol
Posted by: Joeray | May 6, 2010, 6:51 pm 6:51 pm
Yeah, that’ll really accomplish something since the person must be caught doing some terrorist activity first, sounds more like political grandstanding from Lieberman and Brown to me.
Posted by: JR | May 6, 2010, 7:26 pm 7:26 pm
Oh yes….SO much better too have terrorist remain protected citizens..NOT…Just another day in paradise courtesy of the Obama Adiminstration…No one should be surprised by this….
Posted by: Parallex View | May 6, 2010, 7:29 pm 7:29 pm
Lieberman, the chairman of the Senate Homeland Security Committee said that it “has become a strategy of al-Qaeda and other Islamist terrorist groups over the past couple of years to recruit U.S. citizens who can train overseas and then use their American passports to re-enter the U.S. for the purposes of planning and carrying out attacks against us. …The legislation we are introducing today will help take that ability away from the terrorists.
He has a very strong argument here. We must make it harder in any way possible for them to move in and out of the country. Not to mention, once they have attempted to carry out their killing mission (whether successful or not), why would we WANT them to keep their status as a citizen? The ONLY reason the terrorists are here, and becoming ‘American citizens’ is to seek out, plot against, and kill as many of us as they possibly can, while freely moving in and out of the US.
I’ll be the first to admit, I don’t know alot about laws and regulations on matters such as this, but speaking as a concerned American, the more than can be done to PREVENT an attack instead of REACTING to it later, the better.
Posted by: Shoe | May 6, 2010, 7:36 pm 7:36 pm
The difference between stripping a US citizen of their citizenship due to the accusation of terrorism versus the actions such as renouncing your citizenship or joining a foreign army fighting against the US is that in the case of the former, it is only an accusation. Do we really want to be stripping citizenship from even people born in the US based on an accusation alone? Where is the hue and cry from the right about government overreach? Oh, that’s right, they don’t have a problem with THIS kind of government overreach.
Posted by: Todd | May 6, 2010, 7:37 pm 7:37 pm
Obviously Obama wouldn’t support this, as his friend Ayers would be the first to have their citizenship revoked.
Posted by: TheDoctor | May 6, 2010, 7:38 pm 7:38 pm
SOUNDS GOOD TO ME!!
Posted by: dave | May 6, 2010, 7:42 pm 7:42 pm
What good does stripping citizenship do? We let illegals stay here, they would just become part of that category! Then they can carry the flag of their native country and protest ! God help this country !
Posted by: Jim | May 6, 2010, 7:48 pm 7:48 pm
The best way is to ensure that we DO NOT ALLOW dual citizenship. So many immigrants,still keep the citizenship of their native countries which allow them privileges and benefits from that country, while holding US citizenship. I had to revoke the citizenship of my country when I was naturalized because my former country will not allow dual nationalities, and therefore will not issue me a passport of that country. The US should do the same, and if naturalized citizens apply for a passport, they must certify under oath that they do NOT possess a valid passport of another country. This is how they get around and travel back and forth to all those places without a record while using a passport of another country. Strip them of US citizenship if they are citizens of another country, and this will ensure better control.
Posted by: karuna | May 6, 2010, 7:58 pm 7:58 pm
You know we are really in trouble when a fairly liberal but common sense (now Independent)well respected Senator from both isle’s of the senate get shot down without a blink of an eyelid. Just who are these RADICALS we have running OUR COUNTRY………INCREDIBLE………
Posted by: newmexico roots | May 6, 2010, 8:08 pm 8:08 pm
I do not see anything in the discussion about due process. As such ot would be hard to give those responsibilities to the State Department.
Posted by: John | May 6, 2010, 8:16 pm 8:16 pm
Excuse me..but isn’t terrorism against this country by American citizens considered being traitors??
Posted by: PJ | May 6, 2010, 8:22 pm 8:22 pm
There were numerous violations which should provide justifiable “cause” to revoke the citizenship. Why wouldn’t the Administration want to show that citizenship is taken seriously.
Posted by: tillyerkt | May 6, 2010, 8:25 pm 8:25 pm
We would be better off not revoking the citizenship. That way they can be tried for TREASON and be terminated.
Posted by: bo | May 6, 2010, 8:26 pm 8:26 pm
Lieberman… WHY is this guy even in office? I seriously would vote for almost ANY high-school kid before I would cast a vote for that turtle on a fencepost.
Posted by: YeahRight | May 6, 2010, 8:34 pm 8:34 pm
If the administration is against it that means its the right thing to do for America.
Posted by: watash60 | May 6, 2010, 8:36 pm 8:36 pm
Some of us see them as terrorists. Others see them as future voters. I would just as soon let them keep it, add treason to their charges and when they are found guilty, strip them of their citizenship the day before the execution.
Posted by: wantingbalance | May 6, 2010, 8:38 pm 8:38 pm
If Liberman and the other Chicken Hawks want to strip Citizens of the United States of their constitutional rights, Al Queda won.
Posted by: Larry Linn | May 6, 2010, 8:40 pm 8:40 pm
Anyone who thinks this is a good idea should be striped of their citizenship at once and placed under lock and key. They clearly have a problem with the principles of America they are enemy’s of the state and acting in support of terrorist.
Posted by: White Knight | May 6, 2010, 8:56 pm 8:56 pm
If Lieberman thinks that this is a “big deal” in fighting U.S. born terrorist…. Lieberman should be “stripped” of his senate seat. There are more effective measures that Lieberman can put forward in the U.S. Senate in our fight against terrorism… but of course, this is the best he could think of, since it’s a political side show.
Posted by: GeorgieBushie | May 6, 2010, 8:57 pm 8:57 pm
Ridiculous! Take his citizenship and send him where? How would we try a non-citizen? Messy… We’re at war. Right? Treason is a capitol offense. That removes everything he has. Swift and deliberate maximum capitol punishment. There are no extenuating circumstances for home grown terrorism. Firing squad just like we would in the field. We’re at war. Leiberman’s not too sharp.
Posted by: Leon Rodriguez | May 6, 2010, 9:13 pm 9:13 pm
Ah, “old Wrong Way Joe”. The man never met a stupid idea he didn’t like! – ITWARZ
Posted by: ITWARZ | May 6, 2010, 9:16 pm 9:16 pm
Shades of the movie GI Jane, I think Old Joe has gone and “shaved a little too much fat off the constitution” this time. – ITWARZ
Posted by: ITWARZ | May 6, 2010, 9:22 pm 9:22 pm
Ah the dopey democrats want to protect the criminals. Shows where your priorities are.
Posted by: jonny | May 6, 2010, 9:32 pm 9:32 pm
I worked with a naturalized Packistani for four years. He is a devout Muslim I have no doubt and seems to be a good person with a family. If he heard of a terrorist activity while in a mosque I wonder if he would turn them in or just keep silent. Where would a naturalized,devout Muslim’s loyalty truly lie? With his faith or to his new country? That is why Islam and our democracy are totally incompatable and cannot coexist. The followers of Islam know and accept this but somehow Westerners are blinded because of their separation of church and state secular mentality. To Muslims a secular state is for the infidels.
Posted by: Al | May 6, 2010, 9:34 pm 9:34 pm
Am I the only one growing weary of Gibbs and his commentary?
Posted by: Ed Taylor | May 6, 2010, 9:44 pm 9:44 pm
why would we revoke the citizenship of someone accused of a crime? convicted maybe but not just accused. this is a classical political over-reaction, which is customary in both parties unfortunately.
Posted by: J.R. | May 6, 2010, 9:44 pm 9:44 pm
that would give the State Department the power to revoke the citizenship of American terrorism suspects.
“I have not heard anybody inside the administration that’s been supportive of that idea,” Gibbs said.
…and like we’re supposed to be surprised by this?
Posted by: bill | May 6, 2010, 9:45 pm 9:45 pm
“Am I the only one growing weary of Gibbs and his commentary?”
Yes.
Posted by: Karl Dennahan | May 6, 2010, 10:04 pm 10:04 pm
Once again, Lieberman reminds us why Connecticut Democrats rightfully voted for Ned Lamont in the primary.
And once again, Lieberman reminds us why Connecticut Republicans wrongly voted for Lieberman in the general election.
Posted by: Karl Dennahan | May 6, 2010, 10:06 pm 10:06 pm
So what’s next, gas chambers? I think Lieberman and Brown should be stripped or their citizenship and sent ? What a load of crap, Illegal aliens come here and are giving the same right, afforded under the constitution, as American citizens. and these clowns want to strip Americans of the birth right.
We dealt with parliamentary thugs like this when we formed our great nation and threw them out. Under the bill proposed by these two Bozos our “Founding Fathers” would have been stripped of their basic human rights as well as their constitutional rights. I say these two men are anti- American and traitors.
Posted by: Joe American | May 6, 2010, 10:06 pm 10:06 pm
“I do not see anything in the discussion about due process. As such ot [sic] would be hard to give those responsibilities to the State Department.”
Likely unconstitutional, as well.
Posted by: Karl Dennahan | May 6, 2010, 10:07 pm 10:07 pm
“Lieberman… WHY is this guy even in office? I seriously would vote for almost ANY high-school kid before I would cast a vote for that turtle on a fencepost.”
Agreed.
Posted by: Karl Dennahan | May 6, 2010, 10:07 pm 10:07 pm
“Anyone who thinks this is a good idea should be striped of their citizenship at once and placed under lock and key. They clearly have a problem with the principles of America they are enemy’s of the state and acting in support of terrorist.”
Agreed.
Posted by: Karl Dennahan | May 6, 2010, 10:08 pm 10:08 pm
“If Lieberman thinks that this is a “big deal” in fighting U.S. born terrorist…. Lieberman should be “stripped” of his senate seat. There are more effective measures that Lieberman can put forward in the U.S. Senate in our fight against terrorism… but of course, this is the best he could think of, since it’s a political side show.”
Agreed.
Posted by: Karl Dennahan | May 6, 2010, 10:08 pm 10:08 pm
“why would we revoke the citizenship of someone accused of a crime? convicted maybe but not just accused. this is a classical political over-reaction, which is customary in both parties unfortunately.”
How have the Democrats (other than Lieberman) done such things? Cite specific examples.
Posted by: Karl Dennahan | May 6, 2010, 10:09 pm 10:09 pm
My personal opinion is that Lieberman and Brown are Anti-American and therefore traitors. Throw the bums out of office
Posted by: Joe American | May 6, 2010, 10:09 pm 10:09 pm
“So what’s next, gas chambers? I think Lieberman and Brown should be stripped or their citizenship and sent ? What a load of crap, Illegal aliens come here and are giving the same right, afforded under the constitution, as American citizens. and these clowns want to strip Americans of the birth right.
We dealt with parliamentary thugs like this when we formed our great nation and threw them out. Under the bill proposed by these two Bozos our “Founding Fathers” would have been stripped of their basic human rights as well as their constitutional rights. I say these two men are anti- American and traitors.”
Agreed.
Posted by: Karl Dennahan | May 6, 2010, 10:10 pm 10:10 pm
White House may balk, but they don’t get to vote on it.
Posted by: bo | May 6, 2010, 10:14 pm 10:14 pm
“I have not heard anybody inside the administration that’s been supportive of that idea,” Gibbs said.
Naturally. Any idea put forth to protect this nation is not supported by this lame administration.
Counting the seconds till the 2012 election.
Posted by: james432 | May 6, 2010, 10:55 pm 10:55 pm
Joe American wrote: “My personal opinion is that Lieberman and Brown are Anti-American and therefore traitors. Throw the bums out of office”
.
How about Nidal Hasan or Faisal Shahzad? What do you think should happen to their citizenship? What do you think would be an appropriate treatment for them?
Posted by: gk | May 6, 2010, 11:05 pm 11:05 pm
If you revoke the 14th amendment Federal citizenship aka United States Citizen. Does this mean that person will return to being a preamble citizen or a State Citizen aka citizen of the United States, like the Amish and they won’t have to participate in the Income tax, Social Security and Medicare?
Posted by: s.gashman | May 6, 2010, 11:07 pm 11:07 pm
I can’t believe these people would so willingly turn their backs on everythign we’re supposed to stand for.
Posted by: secondlook | May 6, 2010, 11:57 pm 11:57 pm
Lieberman needs to have his head examined — he wants to strip Americans of their citizenship if they are connected with terrorism. Meanwhile, there’s talk on the Hill about giving amnesty and citizenship to the criminals who crossed our borders illegally and now live in just about every State and are on Medicaid. get assistance with food and housing among other things. Americans who are found guilty of terrorism must be punished but to suggest the be stripped of their citizenship is ridiculous.
This is exactly the kind of behavior we must come to expect since Obama’s administration has increased the size of government and increased federal control over more and more of our lives. This is just the beginning of what’s to come.
Posted by: Elle | May 7, 2010, 12:44 am 12:44 am
Lieberman is an idiot. He spouts of at the mouth on a lot of topics.
Posted by: Deb | May 7, 2010, 1:14 am 1:14 am
I agree with Glenn Beck.
I disagree with pretty much everything else he says but I agree with him on this issue.
Posted by: Ryan C | May 7, 2010, 1:29 am 1:29 am
I find it interesting that people in Congress want to wrap themselves in the Constitution when it’s convenient and then burn that very same document the next day…..could we please remove these fools from office?
Posted by: dk | May 7, 2010, 1:32 am 1:32 am
What do you think would be an appropriate treatment for them?
Posted by: gk
leave em’ in a room with Michelle Bachmann, Cantor, Virginia Foxx, Tom Tancredo, Gov. Perry, Palin, Glenn Beck, Rush, and George Will as ‘the interpreter’
Posted by: Y NOT | May 7, 2010, 2:49 am 2:49 am
While I don’t know about stripping citizenship from American born citizens, and believe in a fair trial, we shouldn’t let the American CRIMINAL Liberties Union turn this guy into a victim either. He tried to kill a large no. of Americans in the middle of Times Square. These people go overseas and learn how to kill their neighbors, and we are supposed to use this countrys constitution, the country who they hate, to protect them?
Posted by: parma hts gary | May 7, 2010, 7:11 am 7:11 am
Y NOT wrote: “leave em’ in a room with Michelle Bachmann, Cantor, Virginia Foxx, Tom Tancredo, Gov. Perry, Palin, Glenn Beck, Rush, and George Will as ‘the interpreter’”
.
Can’t have that… they might actually learn something about being an American.
Posted by: gk | May 7, 2010, 7:27 am 7:27 am
O.K. The Supreme Court should pass a law to administer a litmus test and set term limits for elected officials, start with the Four Horsemen; Sen. Lieberman, Sen. Brown, Reps. Altmire and Reps. Dent. How ridiculous! Considering the state of the nation and other important issues which American’s face (i.e. unemployment, illegal immigration and home foreclosures) why are they wasting time with this frivolous bill? But if you amend the bill to include domestic terrorist, I’ll support the bill…
Posted by: Martin | May 7, 2010, 7:48 am 7:48 am
I’d have to agree with the White House on this one. First, dastardly as the deed was, Shazad has just been accused, not convicted yet. Let’s not get ahead of ourselves. Second, whether he faked the “without mental reservation, or purpose of evasion…” part of the citizenship oath, WE gave him citizenship, and now we have to live with that. As a U.S. citizen, he must now be given due process.
There are alot of other more constructive ways for Congress to deal with terrorism. This seems reactionary and emotional.
Posted by: phalanx | May 7, 2010, 8:12 am 8:12 am
How embarrasing for the people of Connecticut. Hopefully they will remedy that soon. When politicians begin to exhibit signs of abnormal thinking, it’s time to retire them.
Posted by: KsDevil | May 7, 2010, 8:28 am 8:28 am
Just because, the Obama Administration is against it is good enough for me.
And to talk of stripping Joe Lieberman, and Scott Brown of their citizenship, is in its self rediculas. They are not even talking about the citizenship of people born it it the USA, they are talking about naturalized citizens who came into the country and became citizens later, and that is not such a bad idea. And it is already against the law of the US to be in the country illegally, and anyone breaking the law should not be allowed to become a Citizen.
Posted by: notforbiggoverment | May 7, 2010, 9:03 am 9:03 am
Seems like a reasonable proposal to at least consider. “No one in the White House supports the legislation” according to Gibbs. No one? Not one person? Tells us a lot about the committment of the Obama administration to protecting America from terrorism that such a proposal is immediately and summarily dismissed.
Posted by: Ken | May 7, 2010, 9:12 am 9:12 am
“No one in the White House supports the legislation”
—
If they can’t control the questions, Citizenship and Ubama are 2 things dems (and Ubama) don’t want in the same room.
Posted by: smartlillena | May 7, 2010, 9:18 am 9:18 am
Lieberman, You are loyal to no one but yourself and have shown this over the years no matter who stands by you. when it is your turn to back someone up…you are never there but you can sure cry when you think you are being picked on. I am not surprised at the new Senator Scott Brown. Anyone who tries to get financial support for himself by saying Maddow is running against him when she isn’t have a weird sense of loyalty also. I think the funds you did get should be returned..how about that Scott?
Posted by: talmag | May 7, 2010, 11:11 am 11:11 am
Lieberman, does that include members of the Bush Administration that gave money to the Taliban? Police in Arizona would be able to stop anybody at all and say: “Show me your papers.”
Posted by: Stanley Hetz | May 7, 2010, 12:21 pm 12:21 pm
karl: “How have the Democrats (other than Lieberman) done such things? Cite specific examples.”
Ease up big guy. I was merely stating that politicians, up both sides of the aisle, tend to offer solutions that are extreme to curry favor with their constituents. Usually these ideas are over the top and either unnecessary or unconstitutional. Just an observation.
and yes, your democrats are guilty of that too.
Posted by: J.R. | May 7, 2010, 12:39 pm 12:39 pm
What about people working for the CIA? Don’t they cozy up with terrorists when ti suits their needs?
Posted by: Sandra | May 7, 2010, 11:00 pm 11:00 pm
ksdevil…Agreed….So Long Obama 2012…
Posted by: Parallex View | May 8, 2010, 11:50 pm 11:50 pm
Oh my God, this is insane. The government would always have an incentive then to accuse citizens of terrorism so that they could be deprived of their rights and easily convicted. We have to take a stand: The Constitution has to apply to every citizen no matter what they’re accused of. If this bill passes, the terrorists did win. They did change our way of life.
Posted by: Hilary | May 16, 2010, 4:32 am 4:32 am
No one in the White House supports this? Hmm… I do know that President Obama has ordered the killing of Anwar al-Awlaki, who just happens to be a U.S. Citizen… why would they worry about taking their citizenship when we can just order our citizens killed anyway?
Posted by: Tommy | May 7, 2011, 3:29 am 3:29 am