Naturalization Wrongfully Denied on Good Moral Character Grounds

A green card holder was referred to me by another lawyer in March of 2007, because the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services ("USCIS") had denied him naturalization on the basis that he could not show the required good moral character to become a citizen as a result of a conviction he had almost 10 years before he filed his application for naturalization. Shockingly, in denying naturalization, the USCIS admitted that it was not supposed to look at the man’s life beyond the 5 years it was allowed to look at to determine good moral character, but it claimed that a conviction from 10 years ago was “relevant in determining [his] present moral character.” Of course, this man had no other convictions since that one conviction 10 years ago. So naturally, I was perplexed as to how his decade-old conviction was “relevant” in determining his present moral character.

This was a completely erroneous decision by the USCIS. It was erroneous because the USCIS looked beyond the 5 years immediately preceding the filing of the application (which is the time period USCIS is authorized to investigate, unless criminal activity has happened during the five years, in which case the USCIS can look outside the 5-year period). It was an erroneous denial because this man had a clean record for the 5 years USCIS was allowed to investigate, so there was nothing in his record to “trigger” an inquiry beyond the five years. However, the worst part was the fact that the USCIS was one hundred percent wrong in denying naturalization based on the fact that this man had a conviction (no matter how many years ago) that reflected poorly on his character.

Because I realized how wrong the USCIS was, I decided to help this man fight for his chance to become a United States citizen. I filed an appeal challenging the USCIS’ unfavorable decision. I explained to the USCIS that my client was not barred from becoming a United States citizen, because he was never “convicted” of a crime. This was a critical argument. What the USCIS had ignored was the fact that my client was adjudicated a “youthful offender” by the state of New York. Under New York law, a youthful offender adjudication is not a judgment of conviction for a crime or any other offense. Moreover, it is not a “conviction” for immigration purposes. Therefore, since my client was never “convicted” of a crime that could reflect poorly on his moral character, the USCIS had no basis to deny my client naturalization for "lack of good moral character" as a result of a “conviction.”

Normally, after an appeal is filed, there is an interview on the appeal. My client and I waited...and waited...and waited...and waited...for an interview notice. I filed nine follow up letters with the USCIS office in New York over the course of 2007, 2008, and 2009. Not only did we not get an interview notice, but the USCIS did not even acknowledge my communications or send a notice advising me of the status of the pending appeal.

Eventually, the USCIS decided to interview my client in early 2009. I went with him to the interview to make sure the officer understood why he was eligible for naturalization. It was clear to me that, even after I explained to the interviewing officer and directed to her to the law, she did not understand how my client was eligible to naturalize. She said to us: “We will let you know of our decision.”

Three months after the interview, my client called me and told me that he received an appointment for a Oath Ceremony to be sworn in as a United States citizen! Of course, USCIS did not bother to notify me, the attorney, even though it knew I represented my client. My client was extremely overjoyed and rightfully so! He had been waiting over two years for the USCIS to realize its mistake. I was confident from the beginning that this appeal would result in a victory.

I wish USCIS would review cases more carefully. Naturalization denials, such as the one my client received, are typical and boilerplate. Often, the denial makes no sense whatsoever. One would think that the naturalization unit of the USCIS would be “experienced” in legal issues dealing with eligibility for naturalization. But almost every time I go to a naturalization interview with a client, I am surprised by how little the interviewing officer knows about the legal eligibility requirements. A little common sense and training in dealing with these issues might be the remedy...just a thought!

-Ruchi Thaker