SHARE
COPY LINK

POLITICS

France-based overseas Americans sue to restart citizenship renunciations

A group of overseas Americans sued the State Department on Monday to restart citizenship renunciation services, saying a suspension under the Covid-19 pandemic violated their fundamental rights.

The France-based Accidental Americans group
The France-based Accidental Americans group. Photo: Zakaria ABDELKAFI / AFP

The United States, with rare exceptions, grants citizenship to anyone born on its soil or with a US parent.

A 2010 law aimed largely at avoiding tax dodgers who move abroad has sharply increased the bureaucratic and financial burden for US citizens overseas, including those who may have only peripheral links with the United States.

“Most US citizens, especially those residing in the United States, cherish their citizenship,” said the lawsuit filed in the US District Court in Washington by the Association of Accidental Americans, a French non-profit group, and nine plaintiffs.

“However, for the nine million US citizens living abroad, recent legislation and regulations have transformed US citizenship into a financial nightmare,” it said.

READ ALSO How to renounce American citizenship (and why you might want to)

Fabien Lehagre, president of the France-based association, in a statement said that recent laws “have left accidential Americans with little choice but to renounce US citizenship.”

The group has an ongoing lawsuit to oppose the $2,350 fee to renounce citizenship – a service that was free until 2015 – as unfair and exorbitant.

In the latest lawsuit, the group said that a suspension of services at most US embassies overseas during the pandemic violated a fundamental right under the US Constitution to renounce citizenship.

“In other areas during the Covid-19 emergency, the federal government has found ways to accommodate citizens’ constitutional liberties, while protecting public health and well-being,” the lawsuit said.

“Just as the Covid-19 world has become more flexible, the US government must do the same.”

The lawsuit calls for the immediate resumption of renunciation services, saying that the shutdown violates the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution’s guarantee of due process.

Citing figures from the Internal Revenue Service, the lawsuit said that a record of more than 6,000 Americans renounced their citizenship in 2020.

The lawsuit said that the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act has effectively made US citizens overseas pariahs, with some banks curtailing services for them due to the costs of meeting reporting regulations.

Member comments

Log in here to leave a comment.
Become a Member to leave a comment.

OPINION &ANALYSIS

OPINION: If France is to belong in a multicultural world it must accept its Muslim women

It's another hot summer in France and there's another predictable uproar over the Burkini. If France wants to take its place in a multicultural world then it must make room for all its citizens, writes civil liberties expert Rim-Sarah Alouane.

OPINION: If France is to belong in a multicultural world it must accept its Muslim women

France’s compulsive obsession with the behaviour and dress of its Muslim citizens has taken on worrying proportions, and has turned over the years into a form of mass hysteria. The “burkini affair” is one of many examples.

The burkini is a two-piece full body swimsuit with sleeves, long legs and a headgear. This type of swimming-suit made of Lycra® leaves the face, feet and hands uncovered. It was invented in 2003 by Australian designer Aheda Zanetti, who wanted to develop sporting attire for Muslim women that would allow them to take part in sports activities while accommodating their religious beliefs. While the burkini was first designed for Muslim women, it has also been adopted by many non-Muslim women who wish to cover their bodies for various reasons.

The controversy escalated in 2016, when the French Council of State – France’s highest administrative court – overturned a series of local initiatives to ban the use of burkinis on public beaches. These bans were implemented in an atmosphere of increasing anti-Muslim sentiment by local officials who argued that such attire disturbed the public order. The Council saw no such disturbance and argued that it was an infringement on constitutionally protected civil liberties. This, however, did not end the controversy.

READ ALSO: Why is France’s interior minister getting involved in women’s swimwear?

In response, the political establishment from across the political spectrum tried to find legal loopholes to circumvent the ruling, turning their attention to municipal swimming pools where they could modify the rules governing public services.

A recent controversy involved the Green Party Mayor of Grenoble, Eric Piolle, who authorized the wearing of the burkini (as well as topless swimsuits) in municipal swimming pools, triggering an avalanche of criticism. Interior Minister Gérald Darmanin accused Mr Piolle of entertaining “communitarian provocation” and that authorizing the wearing of the burkini in public swimming pools was contrary to France’s values. Once again, French Muslim women found themselves stigmatised and targeted.

They were accused of being a conduit for Islamist extremism, separatism, patriarchy, and violating the principle of laïcité. This discourse, like so much before it, happened without inviting Muslim women themselves to be a part of the conversation.

Modern interpretations of Laïcité – France’s unique way of managing church-state relations – have become an ideological tool for political identity, a factor of division, and the exclusion of French Muslims from the societies in which they live. How did we get here?

The meaning of the term “laïcité” has become obscured by the fact that its interpretations are diverse and sometimes contradictory.

Its current usage betrays the very liberal intention of the 1905 law on “Separation of Church and State”, the ruling which forms the foundation of the principle. 

Laïcité once defined the territories in which the State is sovereign and religious belief is left at the door. It generates obligations for the state to remain neutral and guarantee the religious freedom and freedom of conscience of its citizens, within the limits of public order.

A significant misinterpretation of the 1905 law persists to this day. The law does not require religious belief or visible signs thereof to be kept in the home. However, politicians and pundits on a daily basis cite the law in their efforts to erase any religious visibility (especially Islam) in the public square.

Any attempt to show visible attributes of faith outside the home are deemed to be a threat to a commonly-held belief that France’s citizens should conform to an imaginary notion of what it means to be French. This very illiberal interpretation of laïcité and religious neutrality goes against the essence of the Law of 1905.

As France continues to mature as a country made up of people from different ethnic and religious backgrounds, vulnerable communities have begun to advocate for their rights to be treated as equals with their fellow French citizens without giving up their personal beliefs and customs.

Critics of the clothing choices of Muslim women have forgotten the fundamental freedoms of the Declaration of  the Rights of Man and the Citizen of 1789, often seeking to free Muslim women from their religion. Even when Muslim women dare to defend their basic rights, they are often accused of being radicalised.

A good Muslim woman is a quiet invisible woman. The irony is that many Muslim women who wear their burkinis to swimming pools or wear headscarves during sports competitions actually go against rigorous interpretations of Islam. In order to justify burkini bans, politicians or commentators will often point to Muslim-majority countries who have similar prohibitions, as if authoritarian states were a role model for France to follow.

Muslim women are perceived as a threat because they shake France’s status quo. The illusion of France being a colour-blind nation has been broken. If France really believes that multicultural communities threaten the character of the country, it must not believe that its culture – one that the entire world looks up to – is actually that strong.

But if France is to take its place in a multicultural world, it needs to come to terms with how vulnerable communities fit within the notion of French identity and make room for all its citizens.

Rim-Sarah Alouane is a doctoral candidate and a researcher in comparative law at the University Toulouse Capitole in France. Her research focuses on civil liberties, constitutional law, and human rights in Europe and North America. She tweets @rimsarah
SHOW COMMENTS