Could you pass a US citizenship test?

[Guy Fawkes]

Could you pass a US citizenship test?

[imgalign=right]http://www.csmonitor.com/var/ezflow_site/storage/images/media/110103-citizenship/9279386-1-eng-US/110103-citizenship_full_300.jpg[/imgalign]In order to become a US citizen, immigrants must pass the Naturalization Test. American citizenship bestows the right to vote, improves the likelihood of family members living in other countries to come and live in the US, gives eligibility for federal jobs, and can be a way to demonstrate loyalty to the US. Applicants must get 6 answers out of 10 in an oral exam to pass the test. According to US Citizenship and Immigration services, 92 percent of applicants pass this test.

 

You must get 58 or more of these test questions correct in order to pass.

 

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2011/0104/Could-you-pass-a-US-citizenship-test/Who-signs-bills

[Guy Fawkes]

Daddy answered 84 of 96 questions correctly for a total score of 88%.

 

(What do you mean that the "American" Indians where the first people here? Could have sworn that it was the Eskimos.)

[maxwellissmart]

Daddy answered 84 of 96 questions correctly for a total score of 88%.

 

(What do you mean that the "American" Indians where the first people here? Could have sworn that it was the Eskimos.)

 

I forgot James Madison wrote the Fed Papers, and some other question about taxes.

[Rick Munroe]

American citizenship ... improves the likelihood of family members living in other countries to come and live in the US

 

Unless they're your legally married gay foreign spouse, in which case you're out of luck.

[Guest]

Unless they're your legally married gay foreign spouse, in which case you're out of luck.

 

Not according to the US 1st Circuit Court. I never quite understand these rulings which don't go into effect "unless the US Supreme Court rules on it." Was the Circuit Court saying "We're right--unanimously. But we're not really sure we're right!"?? Maybe someone here can explain why a court would make a ruling, but order that their ruling will not take effect...

[orbital sander]

Not according to the US 1st Circuit Court. I never quite understand these rulings which don't go into effect "unless the US Supreme Court rules on it." Was the Circuit Court saying "We're right--unanimously. But we're not really sure we're right!"?? Maybe someone here can explain why a court would make a ruling, but order that their ruling will not take effect...

 

I think it is called an appeal, attorneys?

[Guest]

My domestic partner will be taking his citizenship exam in about 10 days. The BCIS gives all applicants a list of all of the possible 100 questions and acceptable answers (they're also available online). I wish I had tests like that in high school or college. I'd ace every test. You have to be half brain-dead not to be able to answer 60% of the questions correctly when you know in advance what questions and answers are. At a certain age cut-off, I think it's 55, the list gets dumbed-down even further to the most simple questions such as "Who's the President of the US?" and "Who's the father of our country?". As a physician, I've had the opportunity to write letters of diagnosis on patients whose brains are so shot that they can't even get those questions right (most often for Alzheimer's). The language requirement also goes away at 50 or 60, depending on how many years you've been a Permanent Resident in this country.

[+ azdr0710]

95/96....stumbled on the wording of #62..."rights for citizens only....."

[Guest]

I think it is called an appeal, attorneys?

 

So is the Court saying it's so sure that its ruling will be invalidated on appeal that the ruling will not take effect???

[orbital sander]

So is the Court saying it's so sure that its ruling will be invalidated on appeal that the ruling will not take effect???

Possibly. Perhaps one our resident attorneys can shed some light on this. It is my guess that rulings very often do not take effect because of appeals, but I am not sure.

[Kevin Slater]

Possibly. Perhaps one our resident attorneys can shed some light on this. It is my guess that rulings very often do not take effect because of appeals, but I am not sure.

 

That depends on whether the judge decides to stay her ruling.

 

Kevin Slater

[Kevin Slater]

Missed one: when was the Constitution written.

 

Kevin Slater

[Guest]

That depends on whether the judge decides to stay her ruling.

 

Kevin Slater

 

Actually, in the case of the U.S. Circuit Court, it's a panel of 3 judges, but your answer is merely a tautology. I was not asking what the legal term was. I was commenting on the nonsensical nature of staying a ruling, especially when it's unanimous and involves denying rights to Americans.

[Guest]

I got all of the questions right, but then again, I've been grilling my DP about this, so I'd better get them right. Actually, I missed the question "What group of people was taken to America and sold as slaves?". I thought that was the Canadians. Just kidding!

[+ azdr0710]

Missed one: when was the Constitution written.

 

Kevin Slater

 

that was tricky as they also included the year the Constitution was finally approved....

[seeker630]

Almost didn't take it because I wasn't sure I WOULD pass (I know I've fogotten a LOT of history in the last 40 years!) But I scored 94/96 - missed the number of Constitutional Amendments and one of the longest rivers in the U.S. (I've forgotten even more geography than history!)

[jgoo]

The only question I missed was the one on when to register with selective service. Only men born between March 29, 1957, and December 31, 1959, were completely exempt from Selective Service registration and I happen to fall in that period so I never paid much attention to that requirement.

 

It would be interesting (perhaps depressing) to see how graduating high school seniors (or college seniors for that fact) would do on such a test today?

[tyro]

As one who teaches high school, I can assure you the results would be abysmal on a VERY good day.

Tyro

[vabballfan]

Oh well, I didn't remember the Federalist Papers and misread a couple of questions so I only got 92 right.

[+ peterhung85]

Yeay!!! I passed 100%!

[+ deej]

Possibly. Perhaps one our resident attorneys can shed some light on this. It is my guess that rulings very often do not take effect because of appeals, but I am not sure.

 

IANAL, but it isn't all that uncommon when an appeal is considered inevitable. It's just that we only hear about it in these high-profile headline cases.

 

I believe the theory is that it's better to not grant something and have to take it away later. Think of Prop8 in California. If Judge Walker's decision hadn't been stayed, the Gays would be getting married while waiting for the Appeals Court. If the court reverses the decsion, WTF about the newlyweds? Are they annulled? What?

[gcursor]

Thanks for posting this Daddy. I enjoyed taking it very much! I also took some of the other tests they have there

[rvwnsd]

94 out of 96. Thanks for posting this link, Daddy.

[citylaw1]

Possibly. Perhaps one our resident attorneys can shed some light on this. It is my guess that rulings very often do not take effect because of appeals, but I am not sure.

 

That's because the ruling only applies to states within the circuit -- Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Maine and New Hampshire -- and Puerto Rico. Only the Supreme Court has the final say in deciding whether a law passed by Congress is unconstitutional.

 

Until Congress passed the law, "the power to define marriage had always been left to individual states, the appeals court said in its ruling.

[citylaw1]

95 out of 96