Naturalization Certificate

In all cases I highly recommend that a newly minted citizen inform all parties of interest of the person's adjustment to citizenship. I don't care if it is required at the moment or not. The reason I believe this is because one never knows what sort of decisions will be made in the future about yourself by another party based on your immigration status as it is recorded in their system. For all we know at some point in the future LPR's could be denied certain currently existing privileges or an employer may decide that in a highly charged environment of war that the employer only wants citizens in their employ. There could also be grants, awards, etc which are only available to citizens, but you didn't notify the interested parties of your citizenship, so when they are notifying about the awards, grants, etc, they neglect to include you. There are many possible scenarios and all of them can be avoided by just informing all interested parties now that you are in fact a citizen.

I for one, upon becoming a citizen, informed my employer (i-9), informed Social Security, informed the FAA (i have a pilot's permit), and notified a few others i deemed relative.
 
In all cases I highly recommend that a newly minted citizen inform all parties of interest of the person's adjustment to citizenship. I don't care if it is required at the moment or not. The reason I believe this is because one never knows what sort of decisions will be made in the future about yourself by another party based on your immigration status as it is recorded in their system. For all we know at some point in the future LPR's could be denied certain currently existing privileges or an employer may decide that in a highly charged environment of war that the employer only wants citizens in their employ. There could also be grants, awards, etc which are only available to citizens, but you didn't notify the interested parties of your citizenship, so when they are notifying about the awards, grants, etc, they neglect to include you. There are many possible scenarios and all of them can be avoided by just informing all interested parties now that you are in fact a citizen.

I for one, upon becoming a citizen, informed my employer (i-9), informed Social Security, informed the FAA (i have a pilot's permit), and notified a few others i deemed relative.

I still think you are thinking like a visitor not like a citizen. The employer shouldn't be using the I-9 for any purpose than to verify eligibility to work--and so it really shouldn't matter at all.

Yes, in practice, it may not always work out like that. But to the extent that the unpredictable intangibles you mention come into play, I think updating the I-9 will hurt, not help.

The reason is that updating an I-9 draws unnecessary attention to the fact that you are not originally from this country. I can pretty much guarantee you that, in the mind of the HR person, they think of updating I-9 forms as being something that foreigners do--it's not something that citizens do. Citizens fill in the I-9 once when hired and then they're done with it. It puts you--not legally but in the mind of the HR person--back in the same category with the folks who need repeated sponsorship for H-1B's or renewals of EAD's, etc.

So right at the moment when you have gotten your citizenship and want to exercise the full privileges of US citizenship, you've unnecessarily reminded HR that you are a foreigner 5+ years after the last time the issue came up. If you want your career to grow into roles that require US citizenship, that's absolutely the last thing you should do.

Of course, legally you are no longer a foreigner, you are a citizen. But I guarantee that in the minds of the HR person, you've now completely unnecessarily tagged yourself as a foreigner all over again, and have set your career back 5+ years. Very foolish thing to do.

New citizens often want to celebrate their citizenship and there is definitely a temporary high or euphoria to it that they want to share with everyone around them. And that's great when it comes to family and friends. But the HR person is, in general, not your family or friend. Updating the I-9 with the HR person will, far from causing them to think of you as a citizen, strongly reinforce the (now incorrect) notion in their mind that you are a foreigner.

Updating government databases like the SSN card and the private pilot records is, obviously, a different matter and not likely to cause a problem. It's a different matter when you are updating records with people you work with every day and whose subtle perceptions of you may affect your job.

Indeed, for the same reason, I'd strongly recommend that when you get your GC (don't wait until you are a citizen) you update your SSN records to get an unrestricted card. That way if you are hired as a GC holder, you show the SSN/DL (not the GC) when filling out the I-9 form. You'd still need to indicate yourself as a GC holder on the I-9 form itself, but they will definitely think of you as more "American" and less "foreign" if you show ID typical of Americans.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
.

The reason is that updating an I-9 draws unnecessary attention to the fact that you are not originally from this country. I can pretty much guarantee you that, in the mind of the HR person, they think of updating I-9 forms as being something that foreigners do--it's not something that citizens do. Citizens fill in the I-9 once when hired and then they're done with it. It puts you--not legally but in the mind of the HR person--back in the same category with the folks who need repeated sponsorship for H-1B's or renewals of EAD's, etc.
.

I respectfully would like to remind you that you were an Alien until you took the oath. That makes you not from this country. After oath, you became citizen but in some paper shows you still as an alien. I think to clarify that will not make me or you friend of HR, or I am not sharing with them my happiness. I am only sharing with them my current status. After I inform that they can't treat me as an alien, in fact I am a proud citizen.
I clearly know nobody cares if you are citizen or not in HR unless you have valid employement which is verified. However, green card is also have an expiration date. When the date comes, they will sure find you and ask you for I 9. What r u gonna tell them? That u r citizen and don't wanna show anything?


What is more is I saw some I 9 information in the package they gave us at the oath ceremony for reference.
 
Of course, legally you are no longer a foreigner, you are a citizen. But I guarantee that in the minds of the HR person, you've now completely unnecessarily tagged yourself as a foreigner all over again, and have set your career back 5+ years. Very foolish thing to do.

Do you really believe this is true? Don't know how we arrived at discrimination by HR just because of updating the I-9 form after becoming a citizen. If you really have seen some discrimination by the HR department after some person updated their I-9 sue them or report them to upper management since such behavior is illegal.
 
Do you really believe this is true? Don't know how we arrived at discrimination by HR just because of updating the I-9 form after becoming a citizen. If you really have seen some discrimination by the HR department after some person updated their I-9 sue them or report them to upper management since such behavior is illegal.

No I don't believe it is true. But gunt was speculating as to what might happen in the "highly charged environment of war". If you are going to speculate about such a situation, it seems unreasonable to assume that updating the I-9 would offer some immunity to the loss of civil liberties that tends to occur in war. Such an assumption is definitely inconsistent with the planet's past history when it comes to war.

gunt was claiming that terrible injustices can occur in war, and that updating the I-9 would offer absolute immunity against such injustices. I agree with the first part of that but not the second.
 
However, green card is also have an expiration date. When the date comes, they will sure find you and ask you for I 9. What r u gonna tell them?

If the employer insists on this they are breaking the law. Please re-read the USCIS link I posted in post #16 of this thread. It is definitely NOT required for a GC holder to update their I-9 when their GC expires, assuming it was valid on the date of hiring. Yes, the GC should be renewed, but that is between the GC holder and USCIS. Their employment authorization is permanent and does NOT need to be updated with the employer.

That's why it's completely silly to update it with the employer when you become a citizen.

Again, you're thinking like a visitor, not like a citizen. A born citizen might present a DL when filling out I-9 on the date of hiring but it wouldn't even occur to them to "update" the I-9 when the the DL is renewed.
 
No I don't believe it is true. But gunt was speculating as to what might happen in the "highly charged environment of war". If you are going to speculate about such a situation, it seems unreasonable to assume that updating the I-9 would offer some immunity to the loss of civil liberties that tends to occur in war. Such an assumption is definitely inconsistent with the planet's past history when it comes to war. gunt was claiming that terrible injustices can occur in war, and that updating the I-9 would offer absolute immunity against such injustices. I agree with the first part of that but not the second.
I have first hand experience with someone being fired during time of war for not being patriotic (not being American). It was done in such a way that could not be considered illegal of course. It was during the highly charged 2003 era. The person in question was not a citizen. I think it is you CalGreenCard that is not understanding the subtleties of being Arab born with an noticeable accent and living in the USA. CalGreenCard is a Canadian and so it is very easy for them to be assumed to be American. Things are much more difficult for most other immigrants. For other immigrants, it is very important to let people know that they are in fact citizens. It is a big deal in affirming their loyalty, which is always under suspicion simply based on their skin color and place of birth. The average American does not understand the immigration process at all, they think that all people who immigrate to the USA have an immediate choice of being a citizen or not. So for someone who is a LPR, this can easily be misinterpreted as a form of disloyalty to the USA.

As mentioned, I informed the FAA of my citizenship change. It was NOT required for me to do so. I did so because it is entirely possible that in the future the FAA could change things and void all non-US citizen FAA permits. 15 years ago there was little difference in how LPRs and citizens were treated by gvmt agencies. Things have changed quite a bit since then. I have been surprised at the number of times my prior status as LPR was identified as requiring different processes than would be the case for a citizen when dealing with a particular gvmt agency. Even if you have had limited contact with various gvmt agencies, you should have at least noticed that US CBP now has separate lines/kiosks for LPRs and citizens, with citizens having priority.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
CalGreenCard is a Canadian.

No I'm not. I'm an American.

In 2003, however, I was Canadian and was fired from my job, at least in part, because I was Canadian and Canada very vocally opposed the Iraq war. So please don't lecture me about something you know nothing about. In all dealings with the US government between 2003 and my naturalization in 2011, I represented myself (accurately) as a citizen of my birth country. My birth country is NOT Canada, and my birth country WAS part of the so-called "coalition of the willing".

Don't you see, also, that you've just proven my point? It doesn't matter where you are from originally--if you draw attention to the fact that you are from another country, it reinforces the now fallacious view that you are not American. All of us on here are doing so, at least online and behind aliases, by virtue of our participation in these boards--so it is somewhat understandable. In dealing with an employer it is unnecessary and not a good idea.

Please don't misunderstand me. I COMPLETELY agree with you that the issues you describe are--sadly--very real. I just think that your course of action could have the exact opposite effect to what you intend and expect.

I see no need to update an I-9 but maybe I should update my name on here. As an American, I'm no longer a green card holder. I also don't live in California anymore.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Don't you see, also, that you've just proven my point? It doesn't matter where you are from originally--if you draw attention to the fact that you are from another country, it reinforces the now fallacious view that you are not American. All of us on here are doing so, at least online and behind aliases, by virtue of our participation in these boards--so it is somewhat understandable. In dealing with an employer it is unnecessary and not a good idea.

I have no problems and concerns about mentioning where I was born, and no fears at all that an employer might not like it. That's just a way for me to identify poor places to work and avoid them like the plague, because top talent isn't interested in working for rednecks. We're a well-known American corporation, and our senior executives are from all over because they are good at what they do. I'd almost argue that being Canadian has been a hindrance because my accent wasn't exotic enough. :)

Setting back one's career 5 years? Who were you working for, FAIR or the KKK?
 
Wow, quite a heated debate here. I thought being an American meant to be able to do stuff your own way without caring what others think of you. That is why I presented my passport card for I-9 last time I was hired and that is why I use my passport card as an ID instead of the driving licence. Setting my career 5 years back? Not in my company and not in my field of work - I, as a US citizen, am in the minority. Some of my "americanized" colleagues who are still on H1B ask me why I still don't use Imperial system or don't do other things in a certain way that is perceived to be more American, and I always respond (jokingly) that it was not a requirement for N-400 :) I guess I am glad not to work where CalGreenCard and grunt used to work and not to experience their problems trying to reassure their "American" identity (albeit in exactly opposite ways).
 
That's just a way for me to identify poor places to work and avoid them like the plague, because top talent isn't interested in working for rednecks. We're a well-known American corporation, and our senior executives are from all over because they are good at what they do.

As gunt says--and this part I DO agree with--the atmosphere in the build up to war in 2003 was highly charged. There are definitely Americans out there who are prejudiced against all foreigners, including Canadians, regardless of (non-American) nationality or skin color.

I don't know whether my boss at the time in 2003 was personally prejudiced. I think it more likely that he considered it a business risk, in the climate of the time, to have foreigners on the payroll and was doing what he could to replace them with citizens. The effect was the same, though--I was out of a job.

I tend to think what happened to me wouldn't have happened at a large corporation--I was working for a very small company owned 100% by a single individual. In that kind of situation, sometimes an individual's personal fears and prejudices come into play.

Setting back one's career 5 years? Who were you working for, FAIR or the KKK?

I guess I haven't been clear so let me try one more time. I personally don't think updating the I-9 will make any difference at all one way or the other--and I also think it won't matter whether someone is originally from Canada, an Arab country, or anywhere else.

But I also think that if it were going to make any difference at all--which I personally don't--I would expect it more likely to hurt than to help.

I DO think that being on a temporary visa can hold back one's career, and in one important way I believe it to be more difficult for Canadians than for anyone other nonimmigrants. The reason is that the TN visa can be renewed indefinitely, and because it is usually quite easy for both employer and employee, there is a tendency to just stick in TN status for a very long time. But you then don't get promoted because you are limited in the kinds of roles you can take on as a TN.

I was on TN for a long time, and watched my foreign co-workers (including some originally from Arab countries) getting GC sponsorship and then getting promoted soon after they got their GC's--whereas I was still stuck in the same role I was hired into. It took me awhile to realize what was happening, but when I finally did, I insisted on GC sponsorship, and my career finally began to move again once I got my GC.

As with everything, YMMV.
 
Wow, quite a heated debate here. I thought being an American meant to be able to do stuff your own way without caring what others think of you. That is why I presented my passport card for I-9 last time I was hired and that is why I use my passport card as an ID instead of the driving licence. Setting my career 5 years back? Not in my company and not in my field of work - I, as a US citizen, am in the minority. Some of my "americanized" colleagues who are still on H1B ask me why I still don't use Imperial system or don't do other things in a certain way that is perceived to be more American, and I always respond (jokingly) that it was not a requirement for N-400 :) I guess I am glad not to work where CalGreenCard and grunt used to work and not to experience their problems trying to reassure their "American" identity (albeit in exactly opposite ways).

Are Americans in the minority in the senior management of your company? If you are interested in career advancement, that's what you need to look at to determine the prospects for a non citizen. When I am evaluating what a company values in its employees, I don't look at the people on the bottom rung. I look at those who are moving up in the ranks.

I can't help but notice that in the hi tech industry in the USA, everyone always says how great an industry it is for foreigners. True at the lower levels. But I can't help but notice that the Mark Zuckerbergs and the Larry Pages and the Sergey Brins and the Jeff Bezos's of the country tend to be people who are originally from the USA. In the case of Sergey Brin, he's an immigrant but got his GC as a derivative from his father--so it was his parents, not Brin himself, who really went through the pain of the process.
 
As mentioned, I informed the FAA of my citizenship change. It was NOT required for me to do so. I did so because it is entirely possible that in the future the FAA could change things and void all non-US citizen FAA permits. 15 years ago there was little difference in how LPRs and citizens were treated by gvmt agencies. Things have changed quite a bit since then. I have been surprised at the number of times my prior status as LPR was identified as requiring different processes than would be the case for a citizen when dealing with a particular gvmt agency. Even if you have had limited contact with various gvmt agencies, you should have at least noticed that US CBP now has separate lines/kiosks for LPRs and citizens, with citizens having priority.

I've also had difficult dealings with the FAA because of my status as a former Canadian. In 1997 I failed my private pilot test when I encountered a redneck FAA examiner who didn't like Canadians.

Now, of course, it is entirely possible that my flying skills just weren't up to snuff. Presumably, since he was the examiner and I was the candidate, he was better qualified to make that call than I was. I still wonder though--if it was truly about my flying skills--why he felt the need to inform me, during the post-checkride debriefing, that he felt my allegedly insufficient flying skills must have "something to do with the fact I was Canadian".

This was in 1997--well before 9/11, well before the Iraq war--when the atmosphere between the USA and Canada was one of close friendship and alliance, and not strained by war.

There are definitely Americans out there who don't like foreigners of any nationality, even from America's traditional close allies (such as Canada). I do think as the immigrant population rises, such xenophobes are becoming a rarer breed--as everyone realizes that to survive in today's world you need to be able to interact successfully with people of many nationalities.
 
Are Americans in the minority in the senior management of your company? If you are interested in career advancement, that's what you need to look at to determine the prospects for a non citizen. When I am evaluating what a company values in its employees, I don't look at the people on the bottom rung. I look at those who are moving up in the ranks.
Fair enough. My company has about 1000 employees. My boss and my bosses boss are on GC (one is a Canadian and another one is Indian). Ranks higher than that also have a lot of non-citizens (mostly from India but also from China). Who are the most typical Americans - HR and sales. Our CEO at one point was immigrant himself. Granted that I cannot go around asking people's immigration status, you have the general picture. In my entire group of 15 people (or like you said "the bottom rung"), I am the only citizen - everybody else are on H1B or TN. Do you really think I would be the first to be promoted based on my immigration status?
 
Top