the six camps set up in the vicinity of Anse-a-Pitres, on the southern Haitian-Dominican border. By the middle of January 2016 the total population was 2,203, mainly young people under the age of 19 (58.3%) with a high percentage of persons claiming to have been born in the Dominican Republic (45.7%). Naturalization Law 169-14 Although these ignominious camps have been largely dismantled, the fact remains that, according to official Dominican figures (2018), only some 20,000 persons denationalized by the Sentence have managed to re-possess some documentation. Hence the potential for cross-border erroneous expatriations continues. For the route towards restitution of nationality for those persons denationalized by the Sentence has been tortuous, as signposted below. “observers on both the xenophobic right and the liberal left had understood the constitutional court’s Sentencia 168/13 to be clear in confirming that citizenship would be retroactively taken from the offspring of unauthorized immigrants” The Dominican Congress approved, in May 2014, Law 169-14, establishing a special protocol to affirm the Dominican citizenship of all those who have been granted official identity documents prior to 2007 on the basis of the registration of their birth on Dominican soil (República Dominicana, Congreso Nacional 2014). For those Dominican-born people of foreign ancestry whose names do not appear in the Civil Registry, the law also provides a path to legal residency and then citizenship, two years later. There is much that is surprisingly liberal in Law 169-14, even as it affirms a basic exclusionary principle, established in a 2009 amendment to the Dominican Constitution, that the Dominican-born children of unauthorized immigrants will henceforth be denied birthright citizenship. Concerning Haitian descendants’ right to jus soli nationality—the matter effectively dealt with by Law 169-14—observers on both the xenophobic right and the liberal left had understood the constitutional court’s Sentencia 168/13 to be clear in confirming that citizenship would be retroactively taken from the offspring of unauthorized immigrants. Law 169-14 provides measures that run contrary to that aim, reasoning in its preamble that even people improperly registered were at no fault if others committed the “error” of registering them at birth as Dominicans. The Law’s preamble also cites the interest of the state in protecting a range of individual rights, including equality, human development, and nationality, as a rationale for setting down procedures for granting Dominican nationality to the Dominican-born. That this concession is characterized as exceptional, with a 2007 end date attached to eligibility, both set important boundaries that permitted the Law’s authors to juggle at least three political desiderata: first, rehttp://community.apsanet.org/migrationcitizenship/home 25