CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 02-01591.h1 — CASE

Case record

ISCR Case 02-01591.h1

A decided public DOHA case, shown for research — not advice or a prediction.

Case Profile
Decision Date6/18/2003
Statusdenied
LevelHEARING
TypeSTANDARD ISCR
Participants
Judge: Burt Smith
Applicant Representation: Pro Se
Case Summary
The judge found that the applicant's family members, who are dual citizens of Canada, could potentially influence his allegiance. However, the applicant's wife, an Austrian-born permanent resident, does not present a security concern. The judge ruled against the applicant on most allegations under Guideline B, except for two subparagraphs where the applicant was found to have mitigated concerns.
Guidelines Evaluated
- Guideline BForeign Influence · Unknown Outcome
- Guideline CForeign Preference · Unknown Outcome
Similar decisions
Other decisions whose allegations read most like this one. Descriptive similarity of the allegations only — not a prediction.
Finding similar decisions…

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 02-01591.h1

deniedJun 18, 2003· Hon. Burt Smith· hearing

Summary

A 30-year-old American-born dual citizen of the United States and Canada was denied a security clearance due to concerns under Guideline B (Foreign Influence) and Guideline C (Foreign Preference). The applicant admitted to holding dual citizenship and expressed a willingness to retain it, having also possessed and used a Canadian passport for travel. This was seen as indicating a divided national allegiance.

Further concerns arose from the applicant's family ties. His father, brother, mother, and sister are all citizens and residents of Canada by choice. While there was no evidence suggesting these family members were agents of the Canadian government or likely to act against U.S. interests, their Canadian citizenship and residency were considered a potential source of foreign influence. Additionally, the applicant's wife is an Austrian-born U.S. permanent resident with relatives in Austria, though she has no financial or property interests there.

Ultimately, the judge found that the applicant's dual citizenship, coupled with the influence of his Canadian family members, created a divided loyalty that posed an unacceptable security risk. The applicant's sworn statement regarding his dual citizenship was deemed more credible than his later claims of undivided allegiance to the U.S., leading to the denial of his security clearance.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant admitted to holding dual citizenship, indicating divided national allegiance.
The applicant's sworn statement about his dual citizenship was deemed more credible than his later claims of undivided allegiance to the U.S.
The applicant's family members are dual citizens of Canada, which could influence his loyalty and decisions.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

DC 1raisedThe Exercise of Dual Citizenship
DC 2raisedPossession And/or Use of a Foreign Passport

Key Rule Quoted

“Guideline B is not limited to situations involving coercive means of influence. Rather, it also covers situations where an Applicant may be vulnerable to non-coercive means of influence.”
— DOHA Appeal Board, ISCR Case No. 99-0511, December 19, 2000.

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedJan 6, 2003
Answer filedFeb 10, 2003Applicant elected to have the case decided on the written record.
Hearing held—No hearing was held.
Decision dateJun 18, 2003

Cite For

Foreign Preference Concerns Under Guideline C
Influence of Family Members on National Allegiance
Non-coercive Influence Considerations Under Guideline B

Editorial summary generated for research. Not legal advice; not a prediction. Verify against the full decision before relying on any quoted language.

Standardized Decision Profile

SEAD-4 Guideline B (Foreign Influence) · descriptive summary of a decided case

Posture: Decision on RecordDecided: denied

The judge found that the applicant's family members, who are dual citizens of Canada, could potentially influence his allegiance. However, the applicant's wife, an Austrian-born permanent resident, does not present a security concern. The judge ruled against the applicant on most allegations under Guideline B, except for two subparagraphs where the applicant was found to have mitigated concerns.

U.S. ties the decision noted: U.S. Spouse or Partner · U.S. Children · U.S. Home or Property · U.S. Career or Business

¶	Allegation	Finding	Relationship	Country	Response	Disqualifying (¶7)	Mitigating applied (¶8)	Mitigation
2.a	The applicant's wife is an Austrian-born US permanent resident with relatives residing in Austria. She has no financial or property interests in Austria.	For Applicant	Spouse Dual or Foreign Citizen Immediate Family	Austria	Denied	—	(a) relationships such that a conflict between foreign and U.S. interests is unlikely (e) promptly complied with reporting requirements	Credited Foreign Assets Divested
2.b	Applicant's father, brother, mother and sister are, by choice, citizens and residents of Canada.	Against Applicant	Parent in Foreign Country Immediate Family	Canada	Denied	(a) contact with a foreign family member/associate/friend creating a heightened risk of exploitation	—	—
2.c	There is no evidence indicating they are agents of the Canadian government or likely to engage in activities inimical to US interests.	For Applicant	Unspecified Foreign Relationship Other	Canada	Denied	—	(a) relationships such that a conflict between foreign and U.S. interests is unlikely (e) promptly complied with reporting requirements	Credited Foreign Assets Divested

Descriptive standardized rendering of a decided public case (Guideline B). The verbatim source decision is shown in full below.

Standardized Decision Profile

SEAD-4 Guideline C (Foreign Preference) · descriptive summary of a decided case

Posture: Decision on RecordDecided: denied

The applicant, a dual citizen of the United States and Canada, admitted to holding dual citizenship and expressed a divided allegiance between the two countries. The judge found that the applicant's preference for foreign citizenship and the possession of a foreign passport were significant concerns, leading to a denial of the security clearance.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶10)	Mitigating applied (¶11)	Mitigation
1.a	The applicant is a dual citizen of the United States and Canada and has not renounced his Canadian citizenship.	Against Applicant	Foreign Citizenship Acquisition or Application	Admitted	(a) applying for and/or acquiring citizenship in any other country (b) failure to report, or fully disclose when required, possession of a passport or identity card issued by any country other than the U.S.	—	—
1.b	The applicant has possessed and used a Canadian passport for travel.	Against Applicant	Foreign Passport Possession or Use	Admitted	(b) failure to report, or fully disclose when required, possession of a passport or identity card issued by any country other than the U.S.	—	—
1.c	The applicant has expressed a willingness to retain dual citizenship and not renounce his Canadian citizenship.	Against Applicant	Failure to Renounce or Surrender Foreign Status	Admitted	(a) applying for and/or acquiring citizenship in any other country	—	—

Descriptive standardized rendering of a decided public case (Guideline C). The verbatim source decision is shown in full below.

Full decision

The complete, official text — footnotes and signatures included — is in the original PDF.