Summary
A 32-year-old naturalized U.S. citizen, who also holds Israeli citizenship, was denied a security clearance due to concerns under Guideline B (Foreign Influence) and Guideline C (Foreign Preference). The denial stemmed from his continued use of an Israeli passport for travel to Israel and his familial connections to Israeli citizens.
Specifically, the applicant possessed and used a valid Israeli passport for multiple trips to Israel between 1995 and 2008, with some uses occurring after he became a naturalized U.S. citizen. He also stated that family obligations might compel him to renew his Israeli passport and return to Israel. His family ties include a brother-in-law and sister-in-law who are attorneys residing in Israel, and other in-laws who are Israeli citizens, though he communicates with them infrequently and has not visited some since 2008.
The judge determined that the applicant's use of his Israeli passport after becoming a U.S. citizen indicated a preference for foreign citizenship. His expressed willingness to renew the passport for family reasons demonstrated a vulnerability to foreign influence, and his familial ties to Israeli citizens created a heightened risk of foreign exploitation. The applicant failed to mitigate these concerns, leading to the denial of his security clearance.
Why the Applicant Was Denied
- The applicant used his Israeli passport to travel to Israel after becoming a U.S. citizen, indicating a preference for foreign citizenship.
- The applicant expressed a willingness to renew his Israeli passport for familial obligations, demonstrating vulnerability to foreign influence.
- The applicant's familial ties to Israeli citizens created a heightened risk of foreign exploitation.
Conditions Referenced
- AG ¶ 6raisedForeign Influence
- AG ¶ 9raisedForeign Preference
- AG ¶ 8(a)rejectedNature of RelationshipsThe applicant's relationships with foreign family members were not deemed minimal enough to mitigate concerns.
- AG ¶ 8(c)rejectedCasual ContactThe applicant's contact with his in-laws was not considered casual enough to mitigate foreign influence concerns.
Key Rule Quoted
“When an individual acts in such a way as to indicate a preference for a foreign country over the United States, then he or she may be prone to provide information or make decisions that are harmful to the interests of the United States.”
Procedural Posture
- SOR issuedApr 15, 2010
- Answer filedMay 24, 2010Applicant requested a decision based on the written record.
- Hearing held—No hearing was held.
- Decision dateFeb 7, 2011
Cite For
- Foreign Influence Concerns Related to Familial Ties Under Guideline B
- Foreign Preference Issues Arising From Dual Citizenship and Passport Use Under Guideline C
- The Impact of Foreign Citizenship on Security Clearance Eligibility.