30 chapter one nation-state resulting mainly from globalization. This includes “the emergence of multiple actors, groups and communities partly strengthened by these transformations in the state and increasingly unwilling to automatically identify with a nation as represented by the state,” along with the “organization of formal [citizenship] status, the protection of rights, citizenship practices … [and] the experience of collective identities and solidarities” which remove the nation-state as the “exclusive site for the enactment of citizenship” (Sassen 2002, 278). One’s reading of citizenship as a tool for delimitation or suppression, and/or as a tool for self-protection, resistance and emancipation of the political subject depends partly on whether citizenship is understood as a territorialized and rigid legal status, or as a multifaceted practice. Isin explains that a politically dynamic and historically relevant conception of citizenship requires a reformulation of the question ‘what is citizenship?’ to an inquiry into ‘what is called citizenship’ (Isin 2009, 368–372)? Such a refocus would provoke a consideration of the various interests and elements that serve as a catalyst for the interpretation of citizenship as either primarily a de jure or de facto relation. Now, the two interpretations of citizenship as a legal status and as a practice are different, yet related. Scholarly readings of citizenship as formal status concentrate on the inclusive exclusive dynamics and legally inscribed circumstances of residence, naturalization, deportation, (im)migration, detention, statelessness, and visa and passport acquirement.3 This reading is premised on the acquisition of citizenship through one of the three means of jus sanguinis (inherited citizenship through a parent), jus soli (inherited citizenship through birth separately from parentage) or jus domicili (citizenship through naturalization in a host-society) (Isin 2009, 369). In contrast, interpretations of citizenship as a practice often posit social and political transitions such as integration, multiculturalism, coexistence, recognition, nationalism and trans-nationalism as a focus. Treating these as socially reproduced, politically driven and legally inscribed processes that develop slowly over time, readings of citizenship as a practice stress the diverse sites and acts of citizenship that permeate states undergoing such transitions. That said, and regardless of the particular interpretation of citizenship, most of the scholarship on citizenship: first, agrees that its de jure and de facto elements necessarily imply and dispute each other as 3 Isin cites a range of scholarship interpreting citizenship as status. I would also add the writings of Soysal (1994) and Somers (1998) to both lists as they stress the dual importance and interrelatedness of citizenship as status and as practice.