Posted on 06/22/2017 12:43:03 PM PDT by Lurking Libertarian
WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Supreme Court on Thursday limited the government's ability to strip U.S. citizenship from immigrants for lying during the naturalization process.
The justices ruled unanimously in favor of an ethnic Serb from Bosnia who lied about her husband's military service.
Justice Elena Kagan wrote for the court that false statements can lead to the revocation of citizenship only if they "played some role in her naturalization."
The court rejected the position taken by the Trump administration that even minor lies can lead to loss of citizenship.
The woman, Divna Maslenjak, and her family were granted refugee status in 1999 and settled near Akron, Ohio, in 2000. She became a citizen in 2007.
She initially told immigration officials her husband had not served in the Bosnian Serb military. That was a lie, she later conceded, and lower courts upheld a criminal conviction against her. The conviction automatically revoked her citizenship, and she and her husband were deported in October.
Maslenjak was convicted by a jury that was told even an inconsequential lie was enough for a guilty verdict.
The high court returned the case to the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Cincinnati to determine whether Maslenjak's false statements made a difference in the decision to grant her citizenship in the first place.
(Excerpt) Read more at hosted.ap.org ...
Didn’t they take citizenship away from a Ukrainian bishop after he lied about being a Nazi. They found his fingerprint on a postcard.
I suppose just about all the ex-Nazis are dead, so it’s safe to open our borders to the global hordes of liars.
Have to read the decision a bit more.
So, you can lie like a rug to become a U.S. citizen, as long as all your lies don’t supposedly influence the outcome of your process?
Alrighty then!
“played some role in her naturalization.”
I hardly doubt that means you can make stuff up and it’s now ok.
I don't remember if he was a bishop, but there was a case like that. The difference is that Congress has said explicitly that former Nazis are not eligible for naturalization, so his lie was "material" (meaning that, if he had told the truth, he would never have been naturalized). In this case, the jury was (incorrectly) instructed that any lie, whether or not relevant to the decision to naturalize her, was sufficient to revoke her citizenship.
In a prosecution for Perjury, the lie must be “material to the point in question,” not inconsequential. At least that’s the way it is in most state courts. In other words, it had to make a difference whether the lie would be enough to deny citizenship. Apparently it meant enough afterwards to prosecute and deport.
In other words, once the naturalization is in effect, lies, crimes, whatever can't take it away.
Great now the terrorist can lie on the applications and if it is found out...they can stay to terrorize us.....this is so wrong
In almost every area of the law (tax evasion, securities fraud, etc.), a lie is illegal only if it's "material," meaning it had some potential to influence the other side's decision-making.
If I tell you to buy my company's stock because we just discovered oil on land we own, and that's not true, I've committed securities fraud. If I'm trying to sell you stock and I tell you that I love the suit you're wearing, when I really think it's ugly, I haven't committed securities fraud.
This decision just applies that same basic rule to citizenship revocation proceedings. Which is why the case was decided 9-0.
I disagree with the Supremes. Lying during the naturalization process is a sign of a lack of commitment to America. Any lie during the process should be grounds for revocation of citizenship.
Not what the Court decided. Naturalization can still be revoked after the fact if the immigrant lied; the lie just has to have been one that was relevant to the decision to naturalize.
Yes. Misleading headline.
The full decision (including Goresuch's concurring pinion) is here.
The ongoing cheapening of U.S. citizenship
We’re already up to our eyeballs in liars here.
No need to import more.
Sorry, but we should heartily welcome applicants who served in the Bosnian Serb military!!!! There should thus be no reason to lie about such service!
It is only the clintonite/muslim cabal that brands service in the Republika Srpska army as “war criminal”!! In contrast, we have taken in Bosnian muslim “refugees” and “immigrants” carte blanche. Some of them have gone on to join Al Qaeda or ISIS, or even to commit terrorism here in the USA.
Bosnian Serbs make very good Americans—they join our local Orthodox churches and love us. In contrast, muslims of all types are invaders, not immigrants, and want to turn America muslim!!!!
Oh, OK.
They sent it back to the court because the jury was told even an inconsequential lie was sufficient.
Fair enough.
This deportation was initiated by the Obama administration, which also argued for deportation in the Sixth Circuit. But you won’t read that in a single MSM story about this case. They say it was Trump, who wasn’t in office when this case began.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.