If you haven't yet heard about the "ex" member of Isis, Hoda Muthana, she is claiming to no longer a part of the Islamic terrorist organization and is arguing for her US citizenship to allow her to return to the United States.

Due to her ties with the terrorist organization, many people, including the current US government, are against her return. Recently, President Trump has announced that the United States will not accommodate her request, and she will not be allowed to return. In addition to that, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said "[she] does not qualify for citizenship and has no legal basis to return to the country".

Personally, to me, it doesn't make sense that Muthana should be able to return the US. This is generally based on the grounds that she willingly chose to leave the United States to join a terrorist group, and that we have indisputable evidence that she has unfailingly targeted innocent citizens.

But, my emotions are not law, and my overarching belief is that every citizen deserves a fair trial. Even if, like Muthana, they chose to join an appalling terroristic group, she still should be guaranteed the rights enumerated in the law of the land.

The fourteenth amendment articulates that "[no] State [can] deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws". Meaning that, as Hoda Muthana was born in New Jersey and has birthright citizenship, she cannot legally be denied her rights to a fair trial and barred from her place of origin.

Many government officials are speaking out on this instance, and claiming that she will not receive fair treatment because she is no longer a US citizen. And this is where my opinion on the matter changed: the confusion people are having is regarding the right for our state to take away her citizenship. BUT you must consider that Isis has claimed to be its own Caliphate (aka an Islamic state). So as Muthana willingly left the United States to marry into and join another state, this can be interpreted as her renouncing her United States citizenship.

Legally, that is a certifiable way for someone to lose their citizenship and rights. So I ask those against the government's decision on Muthana's case, to reconsider all of the facets and not just skim the surface of what seems "fair".