Irvine, CA man may lose U.S. citizenship for lying in his N400

The thought that they go digging into your distant past (after GC/naturalization) is downright scary.

Curious to know what might have triggered this investigation? A complaint from a disgruntled acquntance is perhaps the most likely cause.
If the prior convictions were in the US it would have been easy to prove the case against him. I wonder however, if the convictions were from back home in Afghanistant how they went about proving the case.

AP
 
tabaliya said:
The thought that they go digging into your distant past (after GC/naturalization) is downright scary.

Curious to know what might have triggered this investigation? A complaint from a disgruntled acquntance is perhaps the most likely cause.
If the prior convictions were in the US it would have been easy to prove the case against him. I wonder however, if the convictions were from back home in Afghanistant how they went about proving the case.

AP
Click to expand...

I wonder also wouldn't the past convictions show up in the Background Check if they were convictions in the US/State Justice System?
 
I think this guy is a rare instance. He was convicted of passport Fraud in 2006 . And that was what started the investigation.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
thedeepsea said:
I think this guy is a rare instance. He was convicted of passport Fraud in 2006 . And that was what started the investigation.
Click to expand...

Thx for clarifying. Yes I read about it in some other reports on the web. It seems he applied for a passport under a different name!! That's bizzarre.
 
Also i dont agree with deporting him back to AFGANISTAN. Imagine sending a man back with his new hatred towards America .If i was Homeland security i would keep him here and keep a close watch on him.
 
I believe the phrase for that will be "keep your enemies closer".


thedeepsea said:
Also i dont agree with deporting him back to AFGANISTAN. Imagine sending a man back with his new hatred towards America .If i was Homeland security i would keep him here and keep a close watch on him.
Click to expand...
 
I agree that there should be a statute of limitation. Big Brother is getting WAY too big...

But, Danny, you were stabbed in the throat?????? DAMN!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
cafeconleche said:
I agree that there should be a statute of limitation. Big Brother is getting WAY too big...

But, Danny, you were stabbed in the throat?????? DAMN!
Click to expand...

denaturalization after 20 years is like the 'banishment from kingdom punishment' that medieval kings used for the worst of the traitors. Banishment then as now means pretty much end of the life that you have led. Its a midieval practice which should be abandoned as a form of punishment. Irrespective of the crime, Its a shame that only a section of voting public namely naturalized citizens are viewed as possible candidates for this punishment.
 
Missing the Point.

Hi!

I think people miss the point here. Regardless of a statute of limitation, it does say on the application, for many years, that if you withhold information, or lie, your citizenship may be revoked. While I feel sorry that this has happened to this person, in reality, if he had disclosed this information during his interview, he may not have been granted citizenship based on his moral character. That is my two cents. Additionally, this is a credit to people who do not engage in such activities and live good lives - contributing to society in good ways. However, my compassionate side hopes, that the actions this man has done since may give him some hope at remaining in this country.

There is a lesson to be learned here: don't lie; don't withhold information because it will come back to bite you.

Best Regards,
-jedi
 
I think the problem here is differentiating between a lie and an omission, and also to consider the fairness of the current practice of always being able to come after you, no matter how many years after the fact. I don't think anybody disagrees that with current practice this person should be denaturalized. I am just suggesting that some of this practice should be changed, in particular around adding a statue of limitation. Anyway, as an analogy is like you got a university degree, and 10 years into your profession, someone comes and accuses you of having cheated on a single exam or home assignment, and then they strip you from your degree and possibly never allow you to get one again. Some people might find that fair, I would find that very heavy handed. As it is very difficult to ascertain if someone lied purposefully in the application or just forgot to mention something I would suggest that statue of limitation to strengthen everybody's naturalization citizenship, not only for cheaters but for everyone.

My 2 cents.
 
Huracan said:
I think the problem here is differentiating between a lie and an omission, and also to consider the fairness of the current practice of always being able to come after you, no matter how many years after the fact. I don't think anybody disagrees that with current practice this person should be denaturalized. I am just suggesting that some of this practice should be changed, in particular around adding a statue of limitation. Anyway, as an analogy is like you got a university degree, and 10 years into your profession, someone comes and accuses you of having cheated on a single exam or home assignment, and then they strip you from your degree and possibly never allow you to get one again. Some people might find that fair, I would find that very heavy handed. As it is very difficult to ascertain if someone lied purposefully in the application or just forgot to mention something I would suggest that statue of limitation to strengthen everybody's naturalization citizenship, not only for cheaters but for everyone.

My 2 cents.
Click to expand...

I agree with what you are saying. However this case is an extreme one. He did not fail to mention a speeding or parking ticket. he failed to mention a long list of of prior convictions.
 
Jedi.Knight said:
I think people miss the point here. Regardless of a statute of limitation, it does say on the application, for many years, that if you withhold information, or lie, your citizenship may be revoked. While I feel sorry that this has happened to this person, in reality, if he had disclosed this information during his interview, he may not have been granted citizenship based on his moral character. That is my two cents. Additionally, this is a credit to people who do not engage in such activities and live good lives - contributing to society in good ways.
Click to expand...
You missed the point. We don't really care (at least I don't) about actual liars and frauds who get caught and deported 10 or 50 or 100 years later. The problem is that innocent people may find it impossible to adequately defend themselves if USCIS/ICE comes after them 10 or 20 or 30 years after naturalization.

"Don't lie, don't withhold information" is not sufficient; even if you completely told the truth, as a naturalized citizen you are never secure in your citizenship because they can charge you with anything at anytime in the rest of your life, and you might not be able to produce the evidence or witnesses to fight back due to the extreme length of time since you went through the green card and naturalization processes.
 
Ok...one last time....

Ok. If within 10, 20 or 30 years an individual is still engaging in activities which could lead to deportation...then too bad for that person. Just follow the law..it's not that hard: it's not brain surgery or rocket engineering. I have not heard or read of deportation cases involving innocent people. And if there have been, they must be rare. I didn't miss the point. There are many people who become naturalized lead good lives and don't violate the law. This, in my opinion, are the majority of people. For the few miscreants, too bad for them. If we remain humble, and keep in mind the citizenship - to any nation - is a privilege, that will keep an individual grounded. It's not hard to know when we are doing something wrong: violent crime; hitting someone; stealing; drugs...I could go on, but the point is now academic and of no real practical value.

Best Wishes,
-jedi
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Jedi.Knight said:
Ok. If within 10, 20 or 30 years an individual is still engaging in activities which could lead to deportation...then too bad for that person. Just follow the law..it's not that hard: it's not brain surgery or rocket engineering. I have not heard or read of deportation cases involving innocent people. And if there have been, they must be rare. I didn't miss the point.
Click to expand...
You still missed the point. The point is that naturalized citizenship is a second-class citizenship below the level of born citizenship. No matter how gruesome their crimes are (except for treason), born citizens never have to worry about having their citizenship revoked. But no matter how innocent you are as a naturalized citizen, you always have the looming threat of having your citizenship revoked. As a practical matter they have focused on the more egregious cases, but the law doesn't prevent them from going after you for any random reason at a time when it is too late for you to provide evidence and witnesses to support your innocence.

Maybe you won't worry about it, because the threat of such a thing happening is remote, but if you are naturalized you are still a second class citizen.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Ok...one last time....

I don't mean to be harsh...but you are overly paranoid. I don't have that worry or concern. That is the difference between you and I. Let's agree to disagree...as this will go in circles. I'm a glass is half full kind of person. To me citizenship is just that. Take good care. And may the force be with you always.

Warmest Regards,
-jedi
 
Huracan said:
Anyway, as an analogy is like you got a university degree, and 10 years into your profession, someone comes and accuses you of having cheated on a single exam or home assignment, and then they strip you from your degree and possibly never allow you to get one again.
Click to expand...

That's a poor analogy;comparing cheating on one exam to withholding a previous criminal history on a naturalization application. A better analogy would be the University professor who obtained his PhD and many year later it was found he obtained it through false pretenses (ie:forged documents). I don't think a statute of limitation clause should be applied to the professor since his privilege (PhD title) was obtained by deception.
 
Bobsmyth said:
That's a poor analogy;comparing cheating on one exam to withholding a previous criminal history on a naturalization application. A better analogy would be the University professor who obtained his PhD and many year later it was found he obtained it through false pretenses (ie:forged documents). I don't think a statute of limitation clause should be applied to the professor since his privilege (PhD title) was obtained by deception.
Click to expand...
Again, you are assuming he is guilty. What if he actually isn't guilty of what he's been accused of? How does he successfully defend himself decades after graduation, now that he no longer personally has the assignments he delivered during his studies and the professors who graded him are now dead or senile or simply don't remember him?
 
This is horrible precedent.

There ought to be a statute of limitation. Statute of limitations do not exist to protect the innocent, whatever that means. They exist so that parties do not sit around twiddling their thumbs. If you have a dispute, resolve it. Otherwise forget about it. This way, people dont live under the fear of prosecution or liability. Ofcourse like everything in law, there are exceptions. In some cases, fraud or obfuscation will toll the SOL.

But I think with Immigration issues, there needs to be a firm SOL with few or no exceptions. The onus should be on the USCIS to do their job right the first time around. It is absolutely scary that they are going around digging in people's past after the naturalization process has been completed.

Imagine how this can be used as to persecute or bully someone. Lets say you become a citizen and then become an anti-war activist creating a lot of noise. What is to stop the government from going back into your files and fucking you over for a parking ticket that you forgot to report???
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top