21

So I just found out about a Canadian woman who gave birth on an Air Canada flight on her way to Tokyo on mothers day. In this article: Ada Guan, B.C. woman who gave birth on plane, didn't know she was pregnant, it states,

...depending on where Chloe [the infant] was born along the route, she could be eligible for American citizenship if she was born above Hawaii in addition to Canadian citizenship

Is that really a thing? Does the USA grant citizenship to whomever is born in their airspace? The child has been given Canadian citizenship because the flight originated in Canada, but she was technically born at 35,000 ft somewhere over the pacific ocean (What's her birth certificate going to say? Place of Brith: 27.362444, -161.294046 at 35,000', or "International Waters"?) Would a child be eligible for a US passport if born in the stratosphere somewhere over Hawaii?

From discussion in Comments:

Either that flight took one heck of a detour, the reporter didn't get their facts straight, or Hawaii is in the Bering Sea.

enter image description here

ShemSeger
  • 521
  • 4
  • 12
  • 7
    The article is quoting an immigration lawyer. What evidence are you hoping to find in an answer? – ChrisW May 13 '15 at 16:14
  • @ChrisW - I'd be interested to see what the actual policy states on "aeronautic" births, if there is such a policy. – ShemSeger May 13 '15 at 16:20
  • 2
    FWIW, a direct flight from Calgary Alberta, to Tokyo, Japan would come much closer to Alaska than to Hawaii... – DJohnM May 13 '15 at 21:22
  • 6
    @User58220 That's what I thought, but the reporter says Hawaii. My guess is the lawyer said USA, and a reporter without any concept of flight-paths, and who is only familiar with Mercator maps, interpreted that to mean Hawaii. – ShemSeger May 13 '15 at 21:31
  • Agreed: see "Cartographers for Social Equality", https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OH1bZ0F3zVU – DJohnM May 13 '15 at 22:09
  • 2
    As a Hawaii resident, I am deeply concerned. – Larry OBrien May 14 '15 at 00:17
  • AFAIK, airplane doesn't fly straight as shown on the map. Air Canada provides their [flight route](http://ac.fltmaps.com/en). Inputting Calgary - Tokyo returns a path that doesn't pass Alaska. Whether it's closer to Alaska or Hawaii, that can be discussed. – Andrew T. May 14 '15 at 02:08
  • 2
    @AndrewT. I seriously doubt that site is showing the actual flight path the Air Canada pilots follow, it makes absolutely no sense to fly that far out of the way. Planes don't even fly with a full tank of gas anymore, they aren't going to take a detour that adds hundreds of miles to the flight. – ShemSeger May 14 '15 at 05:00
  • 1
    @AndrewT. I did a quick check on Google Earth, the route shown on the Air Canada site would add about 1,500km onto the trip, they are definitely not flying to Tokyo along that line. – ShemSeger May 14 '15 at 05:04
  • 2
    @AndrewT. there's a lot wrong with that map, starting with the projection and the large number of straight lines. It's not much more accurate than the [tube map](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tube_map) – Chris H May 14 '15 at 12:36
  • 4
    `"given Canadian citizenship because the flight originated in Canada"` umm no, that is because the parents have Canadian citizenship. [From here](http://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/air-born-will-baby-delivered-mid-flight-get-canadian-citizenship-1.2368565) `"The connection to Canada would be either over Canadian soil, Canadian parent or registered Canadian aircraft"` – Habib May 14 '15 at 16:07
  • 1
    @Habib The very first sentence in that article is `"A baby born over the Pacific Ocean during a Canada-to-Japan flight could have grounds to become a Canadian citizen, no matter where her parents are from."` – ShemSeger May 14 '15 at 16:13
  • 1
    @ShemSeger That's true, but the mother is already a legal Canadian, so the origin of the flight is a moot point; the baby's already Canadian. – TylerH May 14 '15 at 19:34
  • 1
    @Habib: "or registered Canadian aircraft" Nope. Being born on a registered Canadian aircraft does not give you Canadian citizenship, unless the child would *otherwise be stateless* (which is extremely rare). – user102008 May 14 '15 at 23:23
  • 1
    @ShemSeger: "The very first sentence in that article is "A baby born over the Pacific Ocean during a Canada-to-Japan flight could have grounds to become a Canadian citizen, no matter where her parents are from."" Well, that's absolutely wrong according to Canadian law. – user102008 May 14 '15 at 23:23
  • Related question on [travel.se]: [If a baby is born on an international flight over international waters, what nationality are they?](http://travel.stackexchange.com/q/35513/3089) – unor May 15 '15 at 20:52
  • @user102008 it's not absolutely wrong. It's actually correct, as your other comment notes; such a baby does have grounds to become a Canadian citizen in (the extremely rare) case he or she would otherwise be stateless. I would say that the statement is more misleading than incorrect. – phoog Apr 17 '17 at 14:41

2 Answers2

34

Page 7 of this Foreign Affairs Manual, titled ACQUISITION OF U.S. CITIZENSHIP BY BIRTH IN THE UNITED STATES, says,

“The rules applicable to vessels obviously apply equally to airplanes. Thus a child born on a plane in the United States or flying over its territory would acquire United States citizenship at birth.”

ChrisW
  • 26,552
  • 5
  • 108
  • 141
11

Yes, a child born within 12 nautical miles of the US (which applies to airspace as well) is in US territory. Under jus soli, a child born in US territory can be granted a US citizenship.

Twelve Nautical Mile Limit: The territorial sea of the United States was formerly three nautical miles. (See, e.g., Cunard S.S. Co. v Mellon, 262 U.S. 100, 122, 43 S. Ct. 504, 67 L. Ed. 894 (1923).) However, the three-mile rule was changed by a Presidential Proclamation in 1988, implementing the territorial-sea provision of the 1982 U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea. (Presidential Proclamation 5928, signed December 27, 1988, published at 54 Federal Register 777, January 9, 1989.) As decreed by that Proclamation, the territorial sea of the United States henceforth extends to 12 nautical miles from the baselines of the United States determined in accordance with international law. (The Proclamation also stated that the jurisdiction of the United States extends to the airspace over the territorial sea.) (See Gordon, Immigration Law and Procedure, Part 8 Nationality and Citizenship, 92.03(2)(b) territorial limits.)

http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/86755.pdf

Plumbing for Ankit
  • 371
  • 1
  • 6
  • Your quotation doesn't seem to back up your assertion. – March Ho May 13 '15 at 17:34
  • 5
    @MarchHo The quotation fully backs up the claims in the first sentence; the second sentence doesn't seem to be in dispute. – David Richerby May 13 '15 at 18:28
  • 1
    "Under jus soli, a child born in US territory can be granted a US citizenship." Actually a child born "in the United States" has U.S. citizenship at birth from. "United States" as used in the Constitution only includes incorporated territories (all currently inhabited U.S. territories are unincorporated); and "United States" as defined in the Immigration and Naturalization Act covers some but not all U.S. territories. – user102008 May 13 '15 at 18:38