Page 33 - The Indian EYE 072525

IMMIGRATION JULY 25, 2025 | The Indian Eye 33

stitutional right to remain in a free look favorably upon efforts to target v. United States that only an illegal act omissions and minor lies” that did not
country unless he voluntarily relin- the relatively ironclad protections of that played a role in an individual’s influence the award of citizenship do
quishes that citizenship.” In a subse- citizenship,” according to an article in acquisition of U.S. citizenship could not necessitate denaturalization.

quent decision, Vance v. Terrazas, 444 Slate where Cyrus Mehta is quoted. lead to criminal denaturalization, nar- As discussed in a prior blog, this
U.S. 253 (1980), the Court held that In civil cases the government must rowing the scope under which an in- ruling is significant. It prohibits a gov-
“in establishing loss of citizenship, the prove its case by clear, convincing, dividual may be denaturalized under ernment official from revoking a nat-
Government must prove an intent to and unequivocal evidence, leaving no 18 U.S.C. § 1425. In Maslenjak, the uralized American’s citizenship based
surrender United States citizenship, reasonable doubt . For a criminal con- government under the Obama and on an insignificant omission or mis-
not just the voluntary commission of viction, the federal government must Trump administrations sued to revoke representation. If the applicant did
an expatriating act such as swearing show “proof beyond a reasonable Diana Maslenjak’s U.S. citizenship not indicate that she was a member
allegiance to a foreign nation. Con- doubt” that the individual violated 18 for making false statements regard- of her school club to the question on
gress does not have any general pow- U.S.C. § 1425 because the individual ing her husband’s membership in a the naturalization application asking
er to take away an American citizen’s knowingly obtained or attempted to Bosnian Serb militia in the 1990s. The about membership in any club at any-
citizenship without his ‘assent,’ which obtain naturalization through fraud Supreme Court ruled that if an appli- time and anywhere in the world, a vin-
means an intent to relinquish citizen- for him or herself or for another in- cant made a false statement during dictive prosecutor can no longer use
ship, whether the intent is expressed dividual. Denaturalization as a result the citizenship process, the statement this as a basis to indict her under 18
in words or is found as a fair inference of a criminal conviction is subject to a must have played some role in the USC 1425(a), seek a conviction and
from his conduct.” These cases are ten-year statute of limitation. individual obtaining citizenship in or- then revoke her citizenship.
discussed at length in a prior blog. In 2017, the Supreme Court held der to warrant the revocation of citi- *Kaitlyn Box is a Partner at Cyrus D.
While the threats against Mam- in a unanimous decision in Maslenjak zenship. The court stated that “small Mehta & Partners PLLC.
dani and O’Donnell have no basis, ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
the Trump administration under the Cyrus D. Mehta, a graduate of Cambridge University and Columbia Law School, is the Managing Partner of Cyrus D. Mehta
Shumate Memorandum may try to & Partners PLLC in New York City. Mr. Mehta is a member of AILA’s Administrative Litigation Task Force; AILA’s EB-5 Com-
denaturalize citizens based on con- mittee; former chair of AILA’s Ethics Committee; special counsel on immigration matters to the Departmental Disciplinary
cealment of a material fact or by
willful misrepresentation before they Committee, Appellate Division, First Department, New York; member of the ABA Commission on Immigration; board member
naturalized. However, it is a high bur- of Volunteers for Legal Services and board member of New York Immigration Coalition. Mr. Mehta is the former chair of the
den on the government to commence Board of Trustees of the American Immigration Council and former chair of the Committee on Immigration and Nationality
denaturalization proceedings against Law of the New York City Bar Association. He is a frequent speaker and writer on various immigration-related issues, including
a citizen in federal court. “The im- on ethics, and is also an adjunct professor of law at Brooklyn Law School, where he teaches a course entitled Immigration and
migration courts have no jurisdiction Work. Mr. Mehta received the AILA 2018 Edith Lowenstein Memorial Award for advancing the practice of immigration law
over U.S. citizens, so the only way for
the administration to attempt to strip and the AILA 2011 Michael Maggio Memorial Award for his outstanding efforts in providing pro bono representation in the
citizenship is to go through the actu- immigration field. He has also received two AILA Presidential Commendations in 2010 and 2016. Mr. Mehta is ranked among
al federal judiciary, which is far more the most highly regarded lawyers in North America by Who’s Who Legal – Corporate Immigration Law 2019 and is also ranked
independent and much less likely to in Chambers USA and Chambers Global 2019 in immigration law, among other rankings.

www.TheIndianEYE.com