15 Sep ISIL Foreign Fighters: You Can’t Take Their Citizenship. Can You Take Their Passports?
The concern over ISIL foreign fighters had ramped up even before President Obama announced that he will preside over a September 24th UN Security Council Meeting on the subject. No surprise that politicians are jumping on the bandwagon. Ted Cruz introduced legislation last week in the Senate that would purport to terminate the citizenship of those associated with terrorist organizations. Michelle Bachmann has done the same over in the House. (Funny how the two chief sponsors of expatriation laws have their own personal experience with the loss of citizenship, Cruz with Canadian, Bachmann with Swiss.)
But Bachmann’s bill goes further in mandating passport revocation.
SEC. 4. AUTHORITY TO DENY OR REVOKE PASSPORT AND PASSPORT CARD.
(a) Ineligibility-
(1) ISSUANCE- Except as provided under subsection (b), the Secretary of State may not issue a passport or passport card to any individual whom the Secretary has determined is a member of an organization the Secretary has designated as a foreign terrorist organization pursuant to section 219 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1189) that is engaging in hostilities against the United States or its allies.
(2) REVOCATION- The Secretary of State shall revoke a passport or passport card previously issued to any individual described in paragraph (1).
(b) Exceptions-
(1) EMERGENCY AND HUMANITARIAN SITUATIONS- Notwithstanding subsection (a), the Secretary of State may issue a passport or passport card, in emergency circumstances or for humanitarian reasons, to an individual described in paragraph (1) of such subsection.
(2) LIMITATION FOR RETURN TO UNITED STATES- Notwithstanding subsection (a)(2), the Secretary of State, before revocation, may–
(A) limit a previously issued passport or passport card only for return travel to the United States; or (B) issue a limited passport or passport card that only permits return travel to the United States.
In contrast to citizenship-stripping, this kind of passport-stripping would pass constitutional muster from a rights perspective. In Haig v. Agee, the Supreme Court upheld passport revocation where justified by national security interests (that case involved Philip Agee, notorious for disclosing the names of undercover CIA operatives). No problem doing that in the context of ISIL fighters, one wouldn’t think.
To the extent there’s an issue here, it would involve separation of powers, Congress dictating to the President. The Supreme Court will have something to say about that this term. But the humanitarian exceptions clause undercuts any claim that this trespasses on presidential power, regardless of where the Zivotovksy case ends up.
At the same time, it’s pretty clear that the President could do this on his own (that was the case in Agee). A UNSC resolution (assuming one is adopted) would further legitimize the policy. Insofar as Congress has trouble getting its act together on anything, the Obama Administration might make passport-stripping a subsidiary component of its anti-ISIL strategy.
A new S.C. Res. and new leg. could raise claims regarding last-in-time, but that rule should only apply with respect to constitutionally valid congressional legislation — which raises your question.
New Q: and how about Pres. action as a “war” measure, C-I-C powers? With the S.C. Res., faithful execution of the “Laws” authority would support the Pres.
New Q: wouldn’t would-be coming-back-home terrorists use another name, a new fake (or someone else’s) passport in any event? And wouldn’t the Exec. want them to keep their passports so that the U.S. can grab them once they arrive at a U.S. airport using their own passport with their own name?