Aspiring Americans Thrown Out in the Cold: The Discriminatory Use of False Testimony Allegations to Deny Naturalization

According to the author of this report, Immigration courts have used the statuory requirement of “good moral character” in a discriminatory manner to deny applications for naturalization. “Aspiring Americans Thrown out in the Cold: The Discriminatory Use of False Testimony Allegations to Deny Naturalization” chronicles the ways in which the “good moral character” clause has been used to deny citizenship applications on unsubstantiated grounds. Researchers have noticed irregularities in the frequency in which applicants are accused of providing “false testimony,” which leads to a rejection of applicants on grounds of “immoral” character. “False testimony” typically amounts to an inconsistency in an applicant’s interview statements and other open source material available to reviewers. Examples of false testimony can include inconsistent dates of trips taken or information on donations made. Author Nermeen Arastu reviewed 158 cases that cite the false testimony clause as the reason for denying naturalization. Prior to September 11, 2001, only 28 cases discuss false testimony while 130 did so after that date. Of the 130 cases, 46 percent include applicants from Muslim-majority nations even though they make up only 12 percent of all naturalization applications. The author notes that the Supreme Court has sought to create limitations on the potentially “draconian” results of this clause, however it continues to be overused by USCIS. (Patrick Bloniasz for The Immigrant Learning Center)

Download now or view online.