Citizenship Rights for Aliens in Germany

Hailbronner, Kay

doi:10.1057/9780333993880_6

Cited by 8 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In this regard, Germany and Spain, which guarantee immigrants more liberal access to permanent residency and nationality both ethnically and culturally, can grant immigrants more inclusive rights than France and Italy. It is noteworthy that the rights of immigrants in France and Italy have recently been circumscribed by their similar restrictive immigration policy reforms (Cinalli & El Hariri, 2011), whereas in Germany, a series of nationality law amendments including dual citizenship have substantively improved immigrants’ social inclusion (Hailbronner & Farahat, 2015).…”

Section: Results Of Fuzzy Set Ideal Type Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Welfare and immigration regimes: A fuzzy set ideal type analysis of immigrants’ social rights and responsibilities in 27 OECD countries

Kim

2020

Asian Soc Wrk & Pol Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article studies the social rights and responsibilities of immigrants in an international comparative perspective, focusing on two main institutions underpinning immigrants’ social rights and responsibilities (i.e., the welfare regime and immigration regime of the host state). Drawing on literature about both welfare and immigration regimes, its fussy set ideal type analysis highlights three fuzzy sets for welfare regimes (i.e., income protection, employment protection, and activation) and three for immigration regimes (individual equality, cultural difference, and citizenship conditionality) in order to explore and explain differences in immigrants’ social rights and responsibilities in different nations. Through a multidimensional investigation of these different dimensions of both welfare and immigration regimes, it presents new insights into the social rights and responsibilities of immigrants. Analysis provides some support for existing understandings of welfare and immigration regimes but simultaneously highlights, in some cases, shifts in regimes which challenge them, particularly existing nations’ classification.

show abstract

Section: Results Of Fuzzy Set Ideal Type Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Welfare and immigration regimes: A fuzzy set ideal type analysis of immigrants’ social rights and responsibilities in 27 OECD countries

Kim

2020

Asian Soc Wrk & Pol Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…32 Failure to provide evidence of the revocation of their parents' nationality results in the loss of their German citizenship. 33 The StAG also closed a loophole in Germany's nationality policy which had enabled Turkish migrants to renounce their Turkish citizenship, apply for German citizenship, and then, upon gaining German nationality, reacquire their Turkish citizenship (with the approval and assistance of the Turkish state). As Rainer Bauböck has noted, this change in the law led to the disenfranchisement of an estimated 20,000 German-Turkish voters prior to the 2005 federal election.…”

Section: The Citizenship Act 1999mentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing the Consequences of the 1999 German Citizenship Act

Triadafilopoulos¹

2012

German Politics and Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This special issue of German Politics and Society offers a retrospective look atthe German Citizenship Act (Staatsangehörigkeitsgesetz, StAG), which passed in1999 and came into force in 2000.1 The law was and continues to be understoodby many academics, policymakers, and lay commentators as constitutinga “paradigm shift” in German citizenship policy and, by extension,prevailing conceptions of German nationhood. The introduction of the lawof territory (jus soli), in particular, was greeted as a welcome acknowledgementof Germany’s de facto status as a modern immigration country. Childrenborn and raised in Germany would no longer be rendered permanentforeigners as a consequence of the dominance of the law of descent (jus sanguinis)in the Reichs- und Staatsangehörigkeitsgesetz (RuStAG), 1913. Proponentsassumed that the reduction of the residency requirement for naturalizationwould also allow greater numbers of long settled immigrants to assume therights and privileges of German nationality. Just as importantly, Germanywould join the European mainstream as regarded citizenship policy. Thestigma associated with its traditionally ethnic conception of nationhoodwould give way to a more positive, civic identity.

show abstract

“…This clause previously enabled migrants to circumvent the effects of the German requirement to renounce one's other citizenship before naturalizing, by reapplying for their origin country citizenship after acquiring German citizenship. While the abolishment of the domestic clause has been observed by legal commentators (Hailbronner and Farahat, 2015 , p. 18) and in media reports (see e.g., even recently, Middle East Monitor, 2020 ), it has been overlooked in all studies we are aware of that refer to aggregate naturalization statistics (Howard, 2008 ; Green, 2012 ) or analyse micro-level statistics on naturalization propensity (Hochman, 2011 ; Street, 2014 ; Gathmann and Keller, 2018 ) 1 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…While the reduction of the residency requirement (Gathmann and Keller, 2018 ) and the introduction of ius soli (Street, 2014 ) have been empirically investigated, one element of the 2000 reform has been overlooked: the abolishment of the “domestic clause.” This clause exempted German citizens, voluntarily acquiring another citizenship, from the automatic loss of German citizenship if they continued living in Germany (Hailbronner and Farahat, 2015 ). This clause previously enabled migrants to circumvent the effects of the German requirement to renounce one's other citizenship before naturalizing, by reapplying for their origin country citizenship after acquiring German citizenship.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Closing a Backdoor to Dual Citizenship: The German Citizenship Law Reform of 2000 and the Abolishment of the “Domestic Clause”

Falcke

Vink

2020

Front. Sociol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The German citizenship law underwent a paradigmatic amendment in 2000. One often overlooked change of this reform was the abolishment of the domestic clause (“Inlandsklausel”) that implied a substantial restriction to de facto dual citizenship acceptance. Combining data from the German Socio-Economic Panel Study (waves 1993–2006) with original data on origin country policies on dual citizenship and citizenship reacquisition, we analyse the impact of the abolishment of the domestic clause on naturalization rates. We apply a difference-in-difference design to investigate the causal impact of this element of the reform which has remained under-studied. We do not find an impact of the abolishment of the domestic clause on naturalization rates, neither among the general migrant population, nor among Turkish migrants who are alleged to be targeted specifically by this reform. These results suggest that a more restrictive approach to dual citizenship did not dissuade migrants from acquiring German citizenship after 2000.

show abstract

Citizenship Rights for Aliens in Germany

Cited by 8 publications

References 1 publication

Welfare and immigration regimes: A fuzzy set ideal type analysis of immigrants’ social rights and responsibilities in 27 OECD countries

Welfare and immigration regimes: A fuzzy set ideal type analysis of immigrants’ social rights and responsibilities in 27 OECD countries

Assessing the Consequences of the 1999 German Citizenship Act

Closing a Backdoor to Dual Citizenship: The German Citizenship Law Reform of 2000 and the Abolishment of the “Domestic Clause”

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About