thelimey

I don't want to delete my post above as it has already been quoted by others, but I do want to clarify some things. Ask 3 different A.I. sites the same question and get 3 different answers; the technology is still in its infancy, and this topic is so esoteric there is not a lot of info out there on it so the A.I. does not have a good dataset to model. Point is, the USCIS cannot revoke citizenship. As mentioned many times above, only a court can. The USCIS can cancel a certificate of naturalization, but this really only applies to people who obtained that certificate without being naturalized - i.e. criminally on the black market, etc. From the USCIS site (key statements bolded): USCIS is authorized to cancel any Certificate of Citizenship or Certificate of Naturalization in cases where USCIS considers that the certificate itself was obtained or created illegally or fraudulently.[6] Cancellation of a certificate under this provision only cancels the certificate and does not affect the citizenship status of the person in whose name the certificate was issued. If someone was unlawfully naturalized or misrepresented or concealed facts during the naturalization process, civil or criminal proceedings must be instituted to revoke the naturalization and the status of the person as a citizen. Once the naturalization is revoked, the court also cancels the person’s Certificate of Naturalization. The main difference between cancellation and revocation proceedings is that cancellation only affects the document, not the person’s underlying status. For this reason, cancellation is only effective against persons who are not citizens, either because they have not complied with the entire naturalization process or because they did not acquire citizenship under law, but who nonetheless have evidence of citizenship which was fraudulently or illegally obtained. Where USCIS has affirmatively granted naturalization to a person, that person is a citizen unless and until that person’s citizenship is revoked.[7] Revocation, therefore, is appropriate when: The person filed an Application for Naturalization (Form N-400); The person appeared at the naturalization interview; The naturalization application was approved; and The person took the Oath of Allegiance for naturalization. By contrast, a person who illegally obtained a Certificate of Naturalization without going through the naturalization process, and was therefore never naturalized by USCIS, is not a citizen of the United States. While the person has a certificate as evidence of U.S. citizenship, the certificate in and of itself, does not confer the status of citizenship. In such cases, USCIS can initiate proceedings to cancel the Certificate of Naturalization.[8] Because the person holding this certificate did not obtain citizenship based on a USCIS process, the person maintains whatever immigration status he or she had. https://www.uscis.gov/policy-manual/volume-12-part-l-chapter-1

Interesting. I hadn't considered that. The lawyers I consulted with said, if you were naturalized you're a citizen until denaturalized. But, A.I. would seem to concur with what you wrote: If someone was not eligible to be naturalized as a U.S. citizen but took the oath and was issued a citizenship certificate, they are not legally considered a U.S. citizen. The issuance of a Certificate of Citizenship or Naturalization does not automatically confer citizenship if the person did not meet the legal requirements for naturalization In such cases, the citizenship may be considered void or subject to revocation. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) has the authority to review and potentially revoke citizenship that was improperly granted. The person would need to remain eligible for citizenship from the time of their interview until they take the oath of allegiance. If it is discovered that someone obtained citizenship fraudulently or without meeting the eligibility requirements, they could face legal consequences, including potential denaturalization proceedings. It's important to note that naturalization is a legal process with specific requirements that must be met, and simply going through the ceremony does not override these requirements.

Interesting. I wonder how they were 'reverted' as my understanding is this is not something USCIS can do. 'Reverting' a citizenship is denaturalization. See posts above re: federal courts/judges.

I forget the exact Supreme Court case which set precedent, but in short, while someone is a citizen of the US they are subject to the same laws as all other citizens. How can a citizen be guilty of impersonating being a citizen? They are a citizen. If they had claimed to be a citizen before being naturalized or after being denaturalized then that would be a false claim of being a US citizen, but for the period they were a citizen they are not falsely claiming to be a citizen, they are truthfully stating they are a citizen. I think a lot of the confusion on forums like this is the name - Visa Journey. Citizenship is not like a Visa. Folks on here are used to thinking through the lens of visas as we spend so many years dealing with them. What if I work on my visa that didn't allow me to work? What if I overstayed on my student visa? What if I get turned away at the port of entry? Visas are issued by USCIS and can be revoked by USCIS. Citizenship isn't like that. Hence so many hurdles to get it. Citizenship can be issued by USCIS, but they cannot revoke it. Just like they cannot deny a citizen entry at a port/airport. Only a federal judge can revoke citizenship. And rarely is it done. Once someone is naturalized they are a citizen. Period. If they are later denaturalized for any reason, it's not retroactive. Let's say someone becomes a citizen and 20 years later it turns out they lied on their application as they'd applied under a new identity and had previously been a criminal mastermind in their birth country. Let's say the government really wants to deport them, but they can't deport a citizen. So they pursue denaturalization. Let's say after a lengthy legal battle the defendant loses and is denaturalized by a federal judge. They are stripped of their citizenship, effect from that moment forward. This reverts them to their previous immigration status. Let's say green card holder. Now they can be deported as that criminal past makes them inadmissible as a permanent resident. But, what if they'd used their rights as a US citizen to vote in multiple elections during that 20 years? So what? No crime occurred. Those votes aren't retroactively invalid. The election folks didn't make a mistake in counting their votes. Their votes were as valid and legal as any other US citizen because they were a citizen at the time. I use that extreme criminal-past example as it's only a handful of denaturalizations per year even under Trump's first term and they are generally for exactly that reason. Serious stuff, not minor clerical errors. Hope that clear things up

nah, not an issue. I won't bore you with the details, but that's been settled by the Supreme Court. I trust my lawyers on this stuff.

I had no issue with passport, SSN, voting etc. I'm a citizen. No debate on that. Taking the oath and having the certificate makes it so. Question is only was the citizenship obtained legally - and, if not, would a federal court revoke it, reverting me to a green card holder who can then apply for citizenship again, bringing us right back to citizenship and wasting the courts and me a bunch of time and money. In theory answers to those questions are yes, but we don't live in a theoretical world. Spirit of law vs. letter of law, etc. But, all that said - I'm only in the situation described in this thread as I didn't know the rules. If I had a do-over I'd just have pushed the oath out a month and avoided the issue. You should do that. Why knowingly put yourself in a tricky situation?

true words. what a situation: you have this thing earlier than your should have this thing but because you have this thing it gives you certain rights and protections so we can’t take this thing away and this is exactly why there are supposed to be so many checks and balances in place to make sure citizenship isn’t granted to someone who isn’t eligible. Be that by a few weeks due to clerical timing or ever due to a shady past. It’s why I trusted their response to my questions in person. Like there’s no way they could accidentally give me this right?

Yup. I’ve read that a few time as well as the underlying law it’s a summary of. Which is worded a little differently.

Of course I want it settled. It’s causing stress I don’t need. At this point I’ve spoken to 4 lawyers. Same takeaway from all: leave it alone until government brings it up. While I agree they won’t have to deal with repercussions of bad advice, it’s been interesting to hear them all reach the same conclusion. Trouble is what does “settled” even mean? Once the oath has been taken the USCIS has no direct power to change anything. Nada. They’d have to ask the DoJ to prosecute as denaturalization. And then have me take another oath. I can’t see them doing that per their own guidance on denaturalization. If you read all the small print of USCIS reopening naturalization cases that have been approved it has to be before the oath. After that. Too late. they can only administratively cancel certificate of naturalization if they were received without an application and oath (ie when their own employee was selling certificates in the 1990s for cash). After the oath a federal court needs to denatrualize before USCIS can cancel the certificate. So the question remains. What does settled mean? And what do I do?

Sorry, should have been clearer. When I wrote "never heard of this happening in 25+ years practicing immigration law", the this I was referring to is the oath occurring ahead of the 5 year date.

Thank you all for the great thoughts above. I spoke to a very experienced immigration attorney today. They noted: Never heard of this happening in 25+ years practicing immigration law They advised against reaching out to USCIS (as did other lawyers I spoke to last week). Kicking can of bees may upset them, put them on the defensive, try to blame me, reopen my entire immigration history. The advice was imagine you never got home and googled it. You asked an official about the 5 year rule, you were told it was part of the 90 day early rule. You took your oath. You went home an American. Many in my situation would have done that. My spouse is one of them. Would never have thought twice about going down a rabbit hole of legal websites. If USCIS or DOJ ever reaches out, then engage a lawyer to help remedy it, and facts will be on my side. No fraud, misleading, willful omission, etc on my part. In fact, I alerted them to the potential issue and was told it's not an issue Lawyer confirmed that, unless denaturalized, I am and remain a citizen of the United States An agency or department such as USCIS, SSA may notice a discrepancy and raise a flag to the DOJ, but only the DOJ and the federal judiciary has the power to revoke the citizenship - and the certificate of naturalization. SSA, for example, cannot say 'you're not a citizen'. Not their call to make. Denaturalization is rare, high burden of proof, and not used to correct mistakes historically. A prosecutor is not obligated to prosecute every potential denaturalization case that crosses their desk. In fact the DOJ guidelines say when determining whether to institute denaturalization proceedings, a prosecutor should consider whether proceedings would result in the “betterment of the citizenship of the country" and that proceedings should not be instituted merely to correct errors and irregularities in an individual’s naturalization, which would properly have been the subject of consideration at the naturalization hearing or of correction on appeal Now, all that said, as someone pointed out above, I am very tempted to get my A# file through FOIA. Perhaps they have my green card date earlier than it actually was in there, meaning from their POV the 5 years was met and no computerized checks would flag it. Why wouldn't the IO have noticed any such discrepancy when she took my physical green card and looked at it? Human error. A tired, stressed, rushed lady who more concerned about getting her schedule back on track than answering my questions. Everyone's got a boss. Bet she was stressed about being an hour behind and not meeting her quota for the day. Does anyone know if a FOIA request can open a can of worms? (See above about not reaching out to USCIS) i.e. whoever is compiling your FOIA request sees a date issue and raises a flag. Or is it just electronic files which someone essentially copies from an internal computer folder and puts in an online portal where you can download them? I will try and dial into the Jim Hacking show tomorrow too... would love to get his take on it. Called his office, offered to pay for some of his time to discuss it directly (I prefer the anonymity of forums to being on a YouTube show), but they don't give legal advice (except on the YouTube show) and only take on cases where there is work to be done.

Trouble is. Every lawyer I spoke to independently said 1. Never heard of this happening 2. Leave it alone. You’re a citizen if you have the paperwork. Only engage a lawyer if it becomes a problem. I’m sure I’ll eventually find a lawyer who sees it as a payday and wants to get involved. But may be a case of a “solution looking for a problem”. There may be other people in my boat who’ve either never noticed and just assumed it was all kosher as part of the 90 days early. (I mean how many people who naturalize have read the actual text of the law versus summaries?). And/or noticed but are more laid back and never thought twice. My spouse is like that and doesn’t understand why I’m not just applying to my passport and moving on, leaving the past in the past.

Honestly, if the USCIS called me tomorrow and said “we made a mistake, we need you to come back in 3 weeks and retake the oath, and meanwhile we’ll send you back your green card” I’d be fine with that. but they’re not going to do that are they. They closed my case and moved on. Needle in haystack. Plus do they want to admit errors? Given the sanctity and seriousness of citizenship I’m a little shocked that it could potentially come down to one employee making a mistake. You’d hope they have checks and balances in place. What was “quality review” for? I would also expect simpe If/then rules to be baked into their computer systems. If applicant requires X number of days between event A and event B then flag error if Y is less than X. If I can’t buy an iPhone charger online without filling in the checkout form fields correctly on Amazon then one shouldn’t be able to fill in citizenship granting forms incorrectly. Not rocket science. I’m intriguied by the “resident since” comment above. If that date was wrong in the system it could explain things but then again you’d think when they looked at my green card they’d have noticed the discrepancy. the IO was flustered. It was 7am. Her computer kept rebooting. She was more stressed than me. She made me fill in my spouses details as an amendment to the n400 and was chiding me for not doing it. I did point out that the n400 clearly says you can skip that if you’re not applying as the spouse of a US citizen. i did note that when I signed to validate the changes to the n400 on their ipad that she correctly had my spouses citizenship as Canadian so there’s no way they erroneously put me under the 3 year spouse rule. the other thing in the interview which seemed strange was she kept asking me about trips to a country I’ve never been to. I assumed this was part of their strategy to try and rattle you. She also asked me about my alias (using my middle name as first name). I’ve never done that ever. She insisted I sign that as part of the n400 updates she made. on both the alias and the trips to a country I’ve never visited she kept saying she had no idea why they were there and it’s all part of a background check done by others. what a sh** show

Re: resident since date. I doubt it. My green card interview day back in 2019 is the date they used on the green card as resident since. I received the AP/EAD card few months prior to that. Didn’t do anything with it. Lawyers handling my green card advised just continuing under the non immigrant work visa (TN1) I was on at that time and had been for the previous 7 years

Well I hope that’s the case. Because while the spirit of the law is certainly on my side, the letter of the law wouldn’t be. USCIS don’t have the power to ignore the law to expedite things. The whole branches of government concept that they test you on in the civics portion of the naturalization process the law says 5 years, not almost 5 years if you round it up. again, I thought this was the case but the uscis told me it was okay. end of the day they’re the ones that signed a certificate saying I met all the requirements to become a citizen. And no one lied to them at any point. They’re the ones that took an application with the “general provision” 5 year box ticked and churned out a naturalization certificate on the day 1798 of permanent residency (5 years is 1828 days). Surprised their computer systems would let them do that if it wasn’t allowed. Especially with more than one person involved along the way at USCIS. even if it never becomes an issue I just don’t like the fact that as a law abiding resident and now citizen I could have issues down the line through someone else’s error.