ISCR Case 99-0372.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 99-0372.h1

grantedNov 1, 1999· Hon. Barry M. Sax· hearing

Summary

A security clearance was granted to an applicant who was a dual citizen of the United States and a foreign country (FC), despite concerns raised under Guidelines B (Foreign Influence) and C (Foreign Preference). The applicant's dual citizenship stemmed from his birth in FC and subsequent naturalization in the U.S. He also possessed an FC passport, obtained in 1991, which he used exclusively for the legal necessity of adopting his daughter.

The Statement of Reasons highlighted that the applicant's mother, father, daughter, and two sisters were FC citizens, with his parents and two sisters residing in the U.S. as permanent residents or on conditional permits. His parents, in their mid-70s, had not obtained U.S. citizenship due to age and language barriers. A third sister, initially an FC citizen residing in another European country, had renounced her FC citizenship and was preparing to move to the U.S. with her family, who had received green cards. The applicant provided financial and settlement assistance to his family in the U.S., all of whom were seeking U.S. citizenship, employment, or education.

The judge determined that the applicant's ties to FC did not pose a security risk. Key mitigating factors included that his dual citizenship was solely a result of birth and naturalization, his FC passport use was limited to his daughter's adoption, and he expressed a willingness to renounce his FC citizenship if required. Ultimately, the security clearance was granted.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

The applicant's dual citizenship was based solely on his birth in FC and his naturalization in the U.S.
The applicant's use of the FC passport was solely for legal purposes related to the adoption of his daughter.
The applicant expressed a willingness to renounce his FC citizenship if necessary.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

E.2.A3.1.2.1raisedExercise of Dual Citizenship
E.2.A3.1.2.2raisedPossession And/or Use of a Foreign Passport

Mitigating

E.2.A3.1.3.1appliedDual Citizenship Is Based Solely on Parents' Citizenship or Birth in a Foreign Country.
E.2.A3.1.3.4appliedIndividual Has Expressed a Willingness to Renounce Dual Citizenship.
E.2.A2.1.3.1appliedImmediate Family Members Are Not Agents of a Foreign Power.

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 issuedAug 9, 1999
Answer filedAug 13, 1999
Hearing heldSep 30, 1999
Decision dateNov 1, 1999

Cite For

Mitigation of Foreign Preference Due to Legal Necessity in Adoption
Consideration of Familial Relationships Under Foreign Influence
Willingness to Renounce Dual Citizenship as a Mitigating Factor

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

¶	Allegation	Finding	Relationship	Country	Response	Disqualifying (¶7)	Mitigating applied (¶8)	Mitigation
2.a	As alleged in the SOR, Applicant's mother, father, daughter, and two sisters are citizens of FC. Applicant's father and mother moved to the U.S. in 1990 and 1995, respectively, and live near Applicant. According to Applicant, his parents have been unable to obtain U.S. citizenship because of their ages (mid-70s) and inability to speak English. They have been granted "permanent residence". Applicant has a 50-year-old brother who lives in Chicago. Two of his three sisters live in the U.S., near Applicant. One is a "permanent resident' and the other is here on a "conditional permit," pending receipt of her "green card". The sisters' older children all attend U.S. universities. Applicant's own natural and adopted daughters also attend U.S. universities.	For Applicant	Parent in Foreign Country Immediate Family	FC	Admitted	—	—	—
2.b	Applicant has a third sister who was a citizen of FC, but who resides in another country. In his response to the SOR allegation 2.b., Applicant "admits" his third sister is a FC citizen. However, in his hearing testimony, Applicant stated that she has renounced her FC citizenship (and paid the $1,200 fee) and has only the citizenship of the other European country in which she has been living since leaving FC many years ago. As of the hearing date, this third sister and her family had received green cards and were preparing to move to the U.S. to take up permanent residence. Applicant has been helping his family financially and to "settle in" to life in the U.S. All family members in the U.S. have sought or are seeking U.S. citizenship and are working or are in business or in school.	For Applicant	Sibling in Foreign Country Immediate Family	FC	Admitted	—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Relationship

Country

Response

Disqualifying (¶7)

Mitigating applied (¶8)

Mitigation

2.a

As alleged in the SOR, Applicant's mother, father, daughter, and two sisters are citizens of FC. Applicant's father and mother moved to the U.S. in 1990 and 1995, respectively, and live near Applicant. According to Applicant, his parents have been unable to obtain U.S. citizenship because of their ages (mid-70s) and inability to speak English. They have been granted "permanent residence". Applicant has a 50-year-old brother who lives in Chicago. Two of his three sisters live in the U.S., near Applicant. One is a "permanent resident' and the other is here on a "conditional permit," pending receipt of her "green card". The sisters' older children all attend U.S. universities. Applicant's own natural and adopted daughters also attend U.S. universities.

For Applicant

Parent in Foreign Country

Immediate Family

Admitted

—

2.b

Applicant has a third sister who was a citizen of FC, but who resides in another country. In his response to the SOR allegation 2.b., Applicant "admits" his third sister is a FC citizen. However, in his hearing testimony, Applicant stated that she has renounced her FC citizenship (and paid the $1,200 fee) and has only the citizenship of the other European country in which she has been living since leaving FC many years ago. As of the hearing date, this third sister and her family had received green cards and were preparing to move to the U.S. to take up permanent residence. Applicant has been helping his family financially and to "settle in" to life in the U.S. All family members in the U.S. have sought or are seeking U.S. citizenship and are working or are in business or in school.

For Applicant

Sibling in Foreign Country

Immediate Family

Admitted

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶10)	Mitigating applied (¶11)	Mitigation
1.a	Applicant exercises dual citizenship (1) with the United States [U.S.] and the foreign country of his birth (FC).	For Applicant	Foreign Citizenship Acquisition or Application	Admitted	—	(a) the foreign citizenship is not in conflict with U.S. national security interests	—
1.b	Applicant possesses a FC passport that he obtained in 1991 at a FC consulate in the U.S.	For Applicant	Foreign Passport Possession or Use	Admitted	—	(a) the foreign citizenship is not in conflict with U.S. national security interests	—

Allegation

Finding

Type

Response

Disqualifying (¶10)

Mitigating applied (¶11)

Mitigation

1.a

Applicant exercises dual citizenship (1) with the United States [U.S.] and the foreign country of his birth (FC).

For Applicant

Foreign Citizenship Acquisition or Application

Admitted

—

(a) the foreign citizenship is not in conflict with U.S. national security interests

—

1.b

Applicant possesses a FC passport that he obtained in 1991 at a FC consulate in the U.S.

For Applicant

Foreign Passport Possession or Use

Admitted

—

(a) the foreign citizenship is not in conflict with U.S. national security interests

—

Loading case…

Case Profile

Summary

Why the Applicant Prevailed

Conditions Referenced

Key Rule Quoted

Procedural Posture

Cite For

Full decision

DEFENSE OFFICE OF HEARINGS AND APPEALS

HEARING

APPEARANCES

STATEMENT OF CASE

FINDINGS OF FACT

POLICIES

CONCLUSION

FORMAL FINDINGS

DECISION

FOOTNOTES