Court Finds that Lying to Immigration Authorities is Grounds for Revoking an Immigrant’s Citizenship

Quality decisions, meaning those made consistent with the original intent of the framers of the Constitution, have not always been delivered. In some cases, the Supreme Court has either invented law, or conjured up a novel interpretation of the law in order to generate the decision desired. Fortunately, that is not what happened this time as the Supreme Court ruled on an immigration case.

Here’s the law in question:

Federal law found at 18 U.S.C. § 1425(a) makes it a crime to “knowingly procur[e], contrary to law, the naturalization of any person” to become a U.S. citizen. (“Naturalization” is the legal term for becoming a citizen.) Moreover, a second federal statute, 8 U.S.C. § 1451(e) adds that a foreigner who obtains U.S. citizenship through such a violation will lose that newly granted citizenship.

Here’s the application of it:

Divna Maslenjak is a Serb who, along with her husband and two children, sought refugee status in 1998 to flee Bosnia. As part of seeking protected status, she swore under oath that the family feared persecution because her husband evaded military service. They were admitted to the United States in 2000 as refugees.

In 2006, she applied for U.S. citizenship. One question on her application asked if she had ever given “false or misleading information” while applying for immigration benefits. Another asked if she had “lied … to gain entry or admission” in this country. She answered “no” to both and became an American citizen in 2007.

Those answers were false. Her husband had served in the Bosnian Serb Army. A third federal statute, 18 U.S.C. § 1015(a), criminalizes making a false sworn statement during naturalization. The U.S. government argued that her statement violating § 1015(a) also counts as a violation of § 1425(a), which meant she must lose her citizenship under § 1451(e).

A judge on the federal district court accepted that argument and stripped Maslenjak of her citizenship. The Sixth Circuit appeals court affirmed.

The question before the Supreme Court was whether the commission of any crime should result in the revocation of one’s citizenship. The Supreme Court ruled that the offense had to be germane to the actual process of naturalization. It also found other errors and remanded the case back to the lower courts to be retried.

“We hold that the Government must establish that an illegal act by the defendant played some role in her acquisition of citizenship,” the Court declared. “When the illegal act is a false statement, that means demonstrating that the defendant lied about facts that would have mattered to an immigration official.”

The majority vacated the lower court’s decision and remanded back to the trial court for a new jury proceeding where a correct explanation of the law would be provided to the jury.

While the case will have to be retried, the Supreme Court is in agreement that lying to immigration authorities during the naturalization process about matters relating directly to that naturalization process is grounds for a later revocation of that naturalization.

It’s a process that, as usual, seems unnecessarily convoluted to those of us who are not members of the legal profession. Nevertheless, the good news is the Supreme Court is getting around to making a fine decision.

Source: Breitbart