The reasoning is that a non-citizen spouse coming to live in their citizen spouse’s home country gets special access to easy naturalisation, whereas in a third country they don’t.
-
-
Replying to @bazzalisk @LizardOrman and
But, of course, the UK’s naturalisation process is actually absurdly onerous for everyone, including the spouses of British citizens.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @bazzalisk @LizardOrman and
why are either of our countries like, why are they
2 replies 1 retweet 0 likes -
Replying to @BootlegGirl @LizardOrman and
History. A lot of it is the same history.
3 replies 1 retweet 2 likes -
Replying to @bazzalisk @BootlegGirl and
The "Anglo-American tradition", such as it is, is vaguely synonymous with the tradition of the common law, with its focus on attempting to maintain the perception of an unbroken tradition reaching back to an ancient origin
2 replies 1 retweet 6 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @bazzalisk and
The US Constitution isn't all that ancient, but we're still very proud of having had a theoretically unbroken constitutional order for our whole existence, and the Constitution attempts to root itself in the common law tradition minus the idea of the monarch as sovereign
1 reply 1 retweet 3 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @bazzalisk and
The idea of sometimes just having to scrap your government and start over, like France being on its Fifth Republic, is alien and shameful to us (and wildly hypocritical considering how often we've tried to impose it on others)
1 reply 2 retweets 6 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @bazzalisk and
And yeah it's an attitude that very much could it survive with the British and American Empires being hegemonic powers for a long time that were largely insulated from the outside world and got stuck in a certain degree of tunnel vision
2 replies 1 retweet 3 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @BootlegGirl and
To be honest it’s really weird that the US has managed to combine that kind of ancient tradition worship with a codified constitution. The only reason the UK manages to have an unbroken set of legal traditions going back over a thousand years is because they can be fudged.
1 reply 1 retweet 3 likes -
Replying to @bazzalisk @arthur_affect and
Major parts of the UK constitution can simply shift or be reinterpreted over time as needed to keep things working. And that’s a constant process.
2 replies 1 retweet 2 likes
We're obviously doing that too we just lie about it a lot
-
-
Replying to @arthur_affect @bazzalisk and
Like of course the wackjob libertarians are right that we're not following the Framers' "original intent" but that's because the idea of doing so is ludicrous
1 reply 1 retweet 6 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @bazzalisk and
In particular even the stodgiest legal scholars kind of have to admit the constitutional order massively changed after the Civil War, and the 14th Amendment basically outright says so and changes the whole equation of "federalism vs states' rights"
1 reply 1 retweet 4 likes - Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.