7
$\begingroup$

In a scenario in which a pregnant Russian woman were to give birth while visiting the International Space Station, and if she were to give birth while on the American side of the ISS, would that baby be an American citizen based on America's Birthright Citizenship law?

In other words, does America's Birthright Citizenship law apply to the American side/sections of the ISS?

Improve this question
$\endgroup$
3
  • 6
    $\begingroup$ space law is absolutely on-topic. $\endgroup$
    – uhoh
    Commented Apr 23, 2019 at 22:17
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ Note that it's generally assumed that a zero-gee + cosmic ray environment will very likely lead to pregnancy complications, so the scenario is unlikely to actually occur. $\endgroup$
    – Russell Borogove
    Commented Apr 23, 2019 at 23:37
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Does a child born in a US ship get US citizenship? Space law is not that different from sea law. $\endgroup$
    – Pere
    Commented Nov 12, 2020 at 18:05

3 Answers 3

Reset to default
4
$\begingroup$

Seems Like It

Absurd hypotheticals aside, the Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) specifies in Article V:

[E]ach Partner shall retain jurisdiction and control over the elements it registers...and over personnel in or on the Space Station who are its nationals.

This ESA resource summarizes:

The Intergovernmental Agreement allows the Space Station Partners States to extend their national jurisdiction in outer space, so the elements they provide (e.g. laboratories) are assimilated to the territories of the Partners States.

For ESA astronauts/modules, I believe this means property/jurisdiction of the EU.

This article interviewing a "space lawyer" explains it essentially as:

multiple embassies floating right over our heads

I think it's fair to say that if a Russian woman gave birth in, say, the Destiny module it would probably be treated the same as if she had walked into the U.S. and given birth. Of course, the U.S. and Russia could just as easily say that they are making an exception to the IGA for an unorthodox situation and that would probably be the end of discussion.

Improve this answer
$\endgroup$
9
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ "Jurisdiction of the EU" Given the differences in laws and jurisdictions between member states, how would that work there? Which law would be applied? $\endgroup$
    – Eth
    Commented Apr 24, 2019 at 9:06
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ The second link adds: "The European States are being treated as one homogenous entity, called the European Partner on the Space Station. But any of the European States may extend their respective national laws and regulations to the European elements, equipment and personnel." This is almost more confusing. I'm not very familiar with what jurisdiction the EU has vs. member states, and I'm not sure if the EU and the aforementioned "European Partner" consist of the same member states, so I won't venture a guess here. $\endgroup$
    – ben
    Commented Apr 24, 2019 at 17:20
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ Well, this clearly deserves its own question then $\endgroup$
    – Eth
    Commented Apr 24, 2019 at 18:04
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ However, practice is that no pregnant woman is sent to space. If it would happen, the likely political outcome would be that the country of the mother would very happily give the citizenship to the baby on the spot, on a politician-accelerated quick channel. And many fanfare, celebration, etc, "First human born in space belongs to us, wow". The mother had no intention to get any other citizenship to the baby because it would look like treason, and she would be loyal to her country (which sent she to the space). $\endgroup$
    – peterh
    Commented Mar 27, 2021 at 21:58
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Being in weightlessness would be at least life-threatening, possibly deadly for the baby. Babies vomit a lot, he/she would likely drown. He/she would be also deadly danger also for the astronauts there (imagine if he poops...). Very likely he/she, with the mother, would come back on the spot with some emergency craft. It is not sure that he/she would survive the 3g of the reentry (the 1g of the out-of-womb life is already hard for a baby). $\endgroup$
    – peterh
    Commented Mar 27, 2021 at 22:07
7
$\begingroup$

No. Although as stated in another answer, the International side of the ISS is under the jurisdiction and control of the relevant partners, that doesn't mean that those modules are the TERRITORY of the relevant states. It is a lot like embassies, which, despite the Simpsons episode to the contrary, are absolutely not territory of their home state, despite being subject to their home state laws. The 14th Amendment of the U.S. constitution requires being born "in the United States" AND being subject to the jurisdiction of the United States (eg not a foreign diplomat located in the U.S.) for birthright citizenship. Babies on an American module of the ISS would meet the second criteria but not the first.

Adding a reference to an excellent SE answer about why babies born in U.S. embassies are NOT automatically American citizens. Same reasons I've described above. https://politics.stackexchange.com/questions/2318/are-persons-born-in-u-s-embassies-u-s-citizens-if-their-parents-are-not-citiz

Improve this answer
$\endgroup$
-1
$\begingroup$

With all due respect to SpaceLawyer, comparing the ISS to an embassy is not accurate. It would be more accurate to compare the ISS to an aircraft. Under the 1944 Convention on International Civil Aviation, articles 17–21, all aircraft have the nationality of the State in which they are registered, and may not have multiple nationalities. However a U.S.-registered aircraft outside U.S. airspace is not considered to be part of U.S. territory. A child born on such an aircraft outside U.S. airspace does not acquire U.S. citizenship by reason of the place of birth. On the other hand, "Comments on the applicability of the 14th Amendment to vessels and planes, are found in Gordon, Immigration Law and Procedure, Part 8, Nationality and Citizenship, Chapter 92, 92.03 (New York: Matthew Bender, 2007). This volume states:

“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.”"

So, the question then becomes where was the ISS when the baby was born? Over the US? That may be a factor, but I would defer to SpaceLawyer on whether or not US airspace extends to the orbit of ISS under the law. If it does, then most likely the situation is the same as if a Russian mom delivers a baby on a United flight over Wisconsin: the baby is American by jus soli. If not, then the situation is that of a Russian mom delivering a baby on a United flight over international waters, and the baby would not acquire US citizenship. He/she would be Russian.

Improve this answer
$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ "With all due respect to SpaceLawyer, comparing the ISS to an embassy is not accurate. It would be more accurate to compare the ISS to an aircraft." How do you come to this conclusion? I've never heard of any indication that the Convention of International Civil Aviation applied to the ISS in any matter. $\endgroup$
    – Erin Anne
    Commented Jun 2 at 4:08
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Also,it should be noted that determining that the ISS was over the United States when a child was born might need an accurate timing of childbirth - not as accurate as if we were dealing with most other countries, but still more accurate that how are childbirths usually timed. $\endgroup$
    – Pere
    Commented Jun 2 at 9:20

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.