UNMAKING CITIZENS: THE EXPANSION OF CITIZENSHIP REVOCATION IN RESPONSE TO TERRORISM 3 Citizenship Revocation Cases 2006201670 4 Conclusion Citizenship revocation expansion is a growing and troubling trend that requires immediate attention, particularly from policy-makers and human rights’ advocates. While historical precedence exists for revocation, particularly in relation to fraud or treason, revocation is expanding in light of growing fears and threats of transnational terrorism. Such fears and threats may be warranted, especially in countries that have witnessed horrific attacks; however, governments and citizenries alike should be cautious of using such fears and threats to alter citizenship policy. While Australia, Canada, and the UK have different revocation policies and contexts, and Canada recently amended its policy altogether as of June 2017, they share similarities, including: (1) an emphasis on terrorism or terrorist-related activities; (2) the provision of extensive legal and decision-making powers to a government minister(s); (3) “renunciation” of citizenship through individual actions (like an act of terrorism); and (4) the targeting of dual citizens, thus rendering the denaturalized stateless, bypassing international human rights’ agreements related to statelessness, and targeting ethnic, racial, and religious minorities.71 70 UK Visas and Immigration Home Office, “Citizenship Revocation Cases 2006-2016,” Freedom of Information Request (FOI 38893), 2016. 71 Arthur White, “Canada Puts New Law to Use, Moves to Revoke Citizenship of Convicted Terrorist,” Vice News, July 2, 2015, https://news.vice.com/article/canada-puts-new-law-to-use-moves-to-revoke-citizenship-of-convicted-terrorist; Heather Horn, “What’s Wrong With Stripping Terrorists of Citizenship?” The Atlantic, January 29, 2016, https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2016/01/taubira-france-citizenship-terrorism/433965/; Ha-Redeye, “Born in Canada, Not a Citizen, but No Place to Go.” Center for Migration Studies of New York | 10