Skip to content
← Decisions by country

Decisions by country · Guideline B · Foreign Influence

Ties to Vietnam in decided clearance cases

What the decided public record shows for cases in which ties to Vietnam were alleged. Ties to any country are not themselves disqualifying, and every case turns on its own facts. This is decided history, not a prediction, and it says nothing about any nationality or community.

Decided cases

95

hearing-level decisions naming this country in the text

Granted

75%

71 granted · 24 denied or revoked

Ties living in the United States

at least 20

decisions stating expressly that the relative or contact lives in the United States, so this is a floor

The ties these cases involved

The kinds of relationship identified on Vietnam allegations in these cases. A case can involve several, and the bars count cases rather than outcomes, so they carry no colour.
Sibling in foreign country59 cases
Parent in foreign country55 cases
Unspecified foreign relationship48 cases
Financial support to foreign relative30 cases
In law in foreign country22 cases
Extended family in foreign country13 cases
Spouse dual or foreign citizen8 cases

Circumstances credited in granted cases

Circumstances the judge expressly credited among granted Vietnam cases where that detail was extracted. Extraction covers a subset of the record, so these are raw counts and not rates.
  • deep U.S. ties · credited in 22 granted cases
  • contact disclosed to authorities · credited in 1 granted case
  • foreign assets divested · credited in 1 granted case
  • severed foreign contact · credited in 1 granted case

Recent decided examples

  • The applicant, a naturalized U.S. citizen, has immediate family members in Vietnam, including two sisters and uncles. The judge found that while these ties raised potential foreign influence concerns,…

  • The judge found that the applicant's foreign ties, including family members in Vietnam, did not pose a security risk. The applicant's relationships were characterized as unlikely to lead to coercion o…

  • The judge found that the applicant mitigated the foreign influence concerns related to his family members in Vietnam. The applicant's ties to his mother and siblings were acknowledged, but the judge c…

  • The judge found against the applicant on the foreign influence concerns under Guideline B, citing the applicant's familial ties to Vietnam, which posed a heightened risk of foreign influence. The appl…

Search all Guideline B decisions mentioning Vietnam

Other countries in the record

How these numbers are measured

Scope: decided hearing-level cases whose Guideline B allegations name this country. The country field is free text in the source, so the variants observed in the record are mapped onto one canonical name and nothing is guessed; records naming several countries in one field are excluded rather than split. A case naming two countries counts once under each. Counts of country risk and of ties living in the United States are counted only where the decision says so expressly, so both are floors. Pages exist only for countries with at least 25 decided cases.

Reading the statistics

  • Granted = access granted or continued; Denied = denied or revoked.
  • Grant rate = granted ÷ (granted + denied).
  • † marks figures based on fewer than 20 cases, too few to be reliable.
  • Hovering any rate shows its statistical range (a 95% confidence interval).
  • Figures are descriptive counts over decided, public DOHA ISCR decisions, never predictions or assessments of any pending case.

Where to go from here

Get help with my case

Send us your question, or the Statement of Reasons you received. No charge, and a CASE analyst reads it. Usually five to ten business days.

Ask a question →

I do this for clients

Rank every decision by how closely it matches a matter, see how the assigned judge has ruled, and keep it together with cited exports.

For attorneys and firms →

Decided public cases: descriptive, never a prediction.