982 S. K. ISHII through naturalisation (Ministry of Justice 2019). Certain stipulations must be considered for naturalisation, including ‘upright conduct’ (Item 3), the capacity to ‘secure a livelihood by one’s own property or ability’ (Item 4), and proof that one ‘has no nationality, or the acquisition of Japanese nationality will result in the loss of foreign nationality’ (Item 5). As Masato had a criminal record, there was a conflict with Item 3; he could not work because he was to be deported, which conflicted with Item 4. Moreover, he could not provide any documents to certify the loss of his foreign nationality or his statelessness, which excluded the possibility of Item 5. At this stage, he found himself de jure stateless. This case shows the invisibility of statelessness (Acciaioli, Brunt, and Clifton 2017, 245; Levin 2018, 31; Willen 2005, 78) among immobilised individuals (Lubkemann 2008, 455). Presumptive foreign nationality made their statelessness ‘hidden from view’ (Redclift 2013a, 170). Critically, stateless people are found in the social spaces of liberal, democratic nation-states (Sigona 2016, 266) rather than during crises, such as wartime or refugee migration (Belton 2017, 117). Indeed, as the vignette shows, statelessness is publicly invisible upon presumptive foreign nationality in liberal democracies, without clear awareness of citizens or migrants, or being framed as an emergency or crisis (Agamben 1998, 181; Kingston 2019, 85; Sassen 2001; Sigona 2016, 266). Discussion As the vignettes above show, time is crucial for the legal production of abandoned children’s statelessness in Japan. When abandoned children gradually lose ties with their parent(s), they unknowingly lower the possibility of legally registering their nationality. With each passing year, the time left to apply for citizenship diminishes. By the time the abandoned children and their guardians become aware of the children’s unstable legal status in their adulthood (Gonzales and Chavez 2012, 267), it is often too late to legitimise their nationality anywhere. Oftentimes without knowing, abandoned children spend their childhood with their status fluctuating between that of included citizens and excluded stateless people. Statelessness is fluid, complicated, and graduated, just as citizenship studies depict citizenship as fluid (Glenn 2011, 3), complicated (Somers 2008, 21), and graduated (Ong 2006, 78). Although the abandoned children discussed in this paper were born and raised in developed, liberal democratic states (Sigona 2016, 266), they lived in nationality limbo. Belton calls this being ‘displaced in situ’ (2017, 117). This phenomenon also shows that both a person’s country of origin and their new country, after immigration, tend to neglect the cost of reproductive labour for multigenerational migrant workers. This is what Parreñas calls ‘the government’s neglect of backlogs (children of immigrants, overlooked second generation)’ (2005, 158). As Parreñas notes, the invisibility of statelessness is crucial because ‘[t]heir invisibility mirrors the social disapproval attached to their families’ (2005, 54). The resultant statelessness is in part an act of commission, in addition to the clearly identified acts of omission. McAuliffe refers to this structure as ‘intergenerational exclusion and marginalization’ (2017, 223). Conclusions This article focused on the role of time in the legal production of statelessness, emphasising the gap between the legal definition of abandoned children and the lengthy status of