“The U.S. Government believes that the prevention of statelessness and the protection of those who are stateless should be priorities for all governments.” Nicole Green and Todd Pierce69 U.S. Department of State, Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration Although there may be some aspects of U.S. law that would need to be reconciled with the obligations under the 1954 Convention, this is surmountable, and acceding to the Convention would be a strong and vital step in demonstrating nationally and globally the United States’ commitment to ensuring that the treatment of stateless persons on U.S. territory adhere to important minimum standards. Accession to the 1954 Convention would also invoke a statelessness status determination procedure which is a prerequisite for ensuring that a State can identify those who are stateless and, thus, in need of protection. © UNHCR/G. Constantine The United States has not ratified either the 1954 Convention relating to the Status of Stateless Persons70 or the 1961 Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness.71 The principal reason asserted by the U.S. Government for not becoming a party to the two conventions is that the instruments contain certain obligations that are inconsistent with U.S. law. For example, the United States has stated that the prohibition against the renunciation of nationality where such renunciation would result in statelessness in the 1961 Convention “conflicts with the U.S. law, which has long recognized the right of Americans to renounce their nationality, even if doing so would lead to statelessness”.72 A stateless woman living in Ukraine. 16 Citizens of Nowhere: