Expedited Citizenship Through Military Service: Current Law, Policy, and Issues

Congressional research reportFeb 25, 2009

Ask Donna

What actually matters in this document.

Text

¡ȱ£ȱȱ¢ȱ

Ǳȱȱ ǰȱ¢ǰȱȱ ȱ

ȱ¢ȱȱ

ȱ¢ȱ

ȱȱȱ

ȱȱ ȱ¢ȱ

¢ȱŘśǰȱŘŖŖşȱ

ȱȱȱ

ŝȬśŝŖŖȱ

ǯǯȱ

řŗŞŞŚȱ

ȱȱȱ

Prepared for Members and Committees of Congress

¡ȱ£ȱȱ¢ȱǱȱȱ ǰȱ¢ǰȱȱ ȱ

¢ȱ

Since the beginning of Operation Iraqi Freedom in March 2003, there has been and continues to

be considerable congressional interest in further streamlining and expediting the naturalization

process for military personnel and in providing immigration benefits specifically for immediate

relatives of such personnel. The reported deaths in action of noncitizen soldiers drew attention to

the immigration laws that grant posthumous citizenship and to the advantages of further

expediting naturalization for noncitizens serving in the United States military. President George

W. Bush officially designated the period beginning on September 11, 2001, as a “period of

hostilities,” which triggered immediate naturalization eligibility for active-duty U.S. military

service members. The Department of Defense and the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services

(USCIS) are cooperating to ensure that military naturalization applications are processed

expeditiously.

Title XVII of P.L. 108-136, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004

(November 24, 2003), amended existing military naturalization statutes by reducing the period of

service required for naturalization based on peacetime service from three years to one year;

waiving fees for naturalization based on military service during peacetime or wartime; permitting

naturalization processing overseas in U.S. embassies, consulates, and military bases; providing

for priority consideration for military leave and transport to finalize naturalization; and by

extending naturalization based on wartime service to members of the Selected Reserve of the

Ready Reserve. The Secretary of Defense or the Secretary’s designee within the U.S. Citizenship

and Immigration Services was authorized to request posthumous citizenship with permission

from the next-of-kin. The law also expanded immigration benefits available to the immediate

relatives (spouses, children, and parents) of citizens, including posthumous citizens, who die from

injuries or illnesses resulting from or aggravated by serving in combat. The effective date was

retroactive to September 11, 2001, except for the fee waivers and provision for naturalization

proceedings abroad, effective October 1, 2004.

Efforts since P.L. 108-136 have focused on further streamlining procedures or extending

immigration benefits to immediate relatives of U.S. service members. Most recently, P.L. 110382, the Military Personnel Citizenship Processing Act, expedited certain military service-related

applications by establishing a Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) liaison office in USCIS to

monitor the completion of FBI background checks and by setting a deadline for processing such

naturalization applications. P.L. 110-251, the Kendell Frederick Citizenship Assistance Act,

streamlined background checks, particularly regarding biometric data. Sections 673 and 674 of

P.L. 110-181, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (January 28, 2008),

ensured reentry into the United States by lawful permanent residents (LPRs) who are spouses and

children accompanying a military service member abroad (whose presence abroad might

otherwise be deemed as abandonment of LPR status) and also provided for overseas

naturalization for such LPRs. This report will be updated as legislative activity occurs or other

events warrant.

ȱȱȱ

¡ȱ£ȱȱ¢ȱǱȱȱ ǰȱ¢ǰȱȱ ȱ

Background ..................................................................................................................................... 1

Brief Overview of Naturalization.............................................................................................. 1

Executive Order 13269 ............................................................................................................. 3

Historical Background .............................................................................................................. 3

Noncitizens in the Military........................................................................................................ 6

Current Law..................................................................................................................................... 8

Naturalization Through Service During Peacetime................................................................... 8

Naturalization Through Active-Duty Service During Hostilities.............................................. 9

Posthumous Naturalization Through Active Duty Service ..................................................... 10

Immigration Benefits for the Family of Military Personnel.....................................................11

Other Relevant Laws and Issues ............................................................................................. 12

Naturalization Restrictions................................................................................................ 12

Restrictions on Alienage in the Armed Forces.................................................................. 13

Expedited Naturalization for Extraordinary Contributions to National Security.............. 15

Special Immigrant............................................................................................................. 15

Legislative Issues .......................................................................................................................... 16

Legislative History .................................................................................................................. 16

P.L. 108-136...................................................................................................................... 16

Subsequent Legislation in the 108th Congress .................................................................. 17

Legislation in the 109th Congress...................................................................................... 18

Legislation in the 110th Congress...................................................................................... 19

Current Issues.......................................................................................................................... 23

Waiver or DOD Adjudication of Naturalization Requirements ........................................ 23

Providing Immigration Benefits for Immediate Relatives ................................................ 24

Prosecutorial Discretion in Removal of U.S. Service Members....................................... 25

Figure 1. Naturalization Petitions Approved FY1990-FY2007....................................................... 2

Figure 2. Noncitizens in the U.S. Military by Service Area: 2003 and 2007 .................................. 6

Figure 3. Top Ten Countries of Countries of Citizenship for Noncitizens in the U.S.

Armed Forces ............................................................................................................................... 7

Figure 4. Top Ten States of Noncitizens in the U.S. Armed Forces, 2006 ...................................... 8

¡ȱ

Appendix A. Active Duty and Selected Reserve Noncitizen Accession Locations, by

State, as of January 2006............................................................................................................ 26

Appendix B. Active Duty Citizenship Status, by Country of Birth: Top 50 Countries ................. 28

Appendix C. Reserve Citizenship Status, by Country of Birth: Top 50 Countries........................ 30

ȱȱȱ

¡ȱ£ȱȱ¢ȱǱȱȱ ǰȱ¢ǰȱȱ ȱ

Author Contact Information .......................................................................................................... 31

Acknowledgments ......................................................................................................................... 31

ȱȱȱ

¡ȱ£ȱȱ¢ȱǱȱȱ ǰȱ¢ǰȱȱ ȱ

Since the beginning of Operation Iraqi Freedom in March 2003, there has been considerable

interest in legislation to expand the citizenship benefits of aliens serving in the military. The

reported deaths in action of noncitizen soldiers drew attention to provisions of the Immigration

and Nationality Act (INA) that grant posthumous citizenship to those who die as a result of

active-duty service during a period of hostilities and to the advantages of further expediting

naturalization for noncitizens serving in the United States military, beyond the former special

naturalization rules for aliens with service in the U.S. military. Title XVII of P.L. 108-136, the

National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (November 24, 2003), entitled

“Naturalization and Other Immigration Benefits for Military Personnel and Families,” amended

military naturalization and posthumous citizenship statutes and provided immigration benefits for

immediate relatives (spouses, children, and parents of citizens)1 of U.S. citizen service members

who die as a result of actual combat. Between September 11, 2001, and December 31, 2008,

about 45,000 service members were naturalized; 6,196 service members were naturalized in

ceremonies held abroad and on Navy ships at sea; and posthumous citizenship was granted to 118

service members.2 As of June 2008, there were 4,255 pending military naturalization applications;

almost 60% of military naturalization cases are completed within 120 days.3 This report gives an

overview of the history of naturalization based on military service, discusses current law and

policy, analyzes data on noncitizens in the military today and prior to the enactment of P.L. 108136, and discusses current legislative proposals and related issues.

ȱ ȱȱ£ȱ

Title 3, Chapter 2 of the INA provides that all LPRs may potentially become citizens through a

process known as naturalization. To naturalize, aliens must have continuously resided in the

United States for five years as LPRs (three years in the case of spouses of U.S. citizens and

members of the armed services); show that they have good moral character; demonstrate the

ability to read, write, speak, and understand English; and pass an examination on the government

and history of the United States.4 Applicants pay fees totaling $675 when they file their materials

and have the option of taking a standardized civics (i.e., government and history of the United

States) test or of having the examiner quiz them on civics as part of their interview. Naturalization

duties are now handled by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) in the Department

of Homeland Security (DHS).5

“Immediate relatives” are defined at INA §201(b)(2)(A)(i), codified at 8 U.S.C. §1151(b)(2)(A)(i), as including

spouses; children; and parents of a citizen who is at least 21 years old. A “child” is defined at INA §101(b), codified at

8 U.S.C. §1101(b), as an unmarried person under twenty-one years of age.

USCIS fact sheet, Naturalization Process for the Military Service (Feb. 3, 2009), available at

http://www.uscis.gov/files/article/USCIS%20FACT%20SHEET%20%20Naturalization_Process_Military_3feb09.pdf.

USCIS Ombudsman, Annual Report 2008 (June 30, 2008), available at http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/

CISOMB_Annual_Report_2008.pdf.

The language requirement is waived for those who are at least 50 years old and have lived in the United States at least

20 years, or who are at least 55 years old and have lived in the United States at least 15 years. Special consideration on

the civics requirement is to be given to aliens who are over 65 years old and have lived in the United States for at least

20 years. Both the language and civics requirements are waived for those who are unable to comply due to physical or

developmental disabilities or mental impairment.

§451(b) of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (P.L. 107-296).

ȱȱȱ

ŗȱ

¡ȱ£ȱȱ¢ȱǱȱȱ ǰȱ¢ǰȱȱ ȱ

The INA also provides for expedited naturalization for noncitizens serving in the U.S. military.6

During peacetime, noncitizens serving honorably in the military may petition to naturalize after a

period(s) of military service aggregating one year rather than the requisite five years of lawful

permanent residence. During periods of military hostilities designated by executive order,

noncitizens serving honorably in the Armed Forces can naturalize immediately. Certain

requirements for naturalization are waived for those who are serving in the U.S. military, notably

the requirement to reside continuously in the United States. The INA also provides that

noncitizens who die during active duty may become citizens posthumously, and also provides that

surviving immediate family members may derive nationality benefits from the granting of

posthumous citizenship.7

. Naturalization Petitions Approved FY1990-FY2007

Figure 1

Source: CRS presentation of USCIS data.

The total number of approved naturalization (N-400) petitions rose in the mid-1990s, dropped in

FY1997, and rose again in FY1999 (Figure 1).8 From FY2003 to FY2006, total naturalization

approvals rose but dropped slightly in FY2007. Interestingly, USCIS reported that more petitions

§329 of INA, 8 U.S.C. §1440.

§329A of INA, 8 U.S.C. §1440-1.

DHS statistics are from Table 20, Office of Immigration Statistics, the 2006 Yearbook of Immigration Statistics.

Mari-Jana Oboroceanu, Information Research Specialist, Knowledge Services Group in the Congressional Research

Service, obtained the DOD statistics; LaTanya Andrews and Jamie L. Hutchinson produced the graphics in this report.

ȱȱȱ

Řȱ

¡ȱ£ȱȱ¢ȱǱȱȱ ǰȱ¢ǰȱȱ ȱ

were approved (604,280) than were filed (602,972) in FY2005, due in part to backlog reduction

efforts.9

The trend line of approved naturalization petitions among the military differs from the overall

trends, as Figure 1 illustrates. Military naturalizations, as one might predict, coincide with the

Persian Gulf Conflict in the early 1990s and what the Bush Administration termed a War on

Terrorism, which are discussed more fully below in this report.

¡ȱȱŗřŘŜşȱ

On July 3, 2002, President George W. Bush officially designated the period beginning on

September 11, 2001, the War on Terrorism, as a “period of hostilities,” which triggered immediate

naturalization eligibility for active-duty U.S. military service members.10 The justification offered

for this order was the war conducted through Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation Noble

Eagle in response to the September 11, 2001, terrorist attack. At the time of the designation, the

Department of Defense (DOD) and the former Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS)

announced that they would work together to ensure that military naturalization applications would

be processed expeditiously.

ȱȱ

Special naturalization provisions for aliens serving in the U.S. military date back at least to the

Civil War,11 and special enactments have been made during major conflicts since that time, up to

and including the Vietnam War. The specific conditions for naturalization under the various

statutes that were enacted before the INA vary.12 For example, the original Civil War statute

affected only persons serving in the armies of the United States and did not include the Navy or

Marine Corps, which were included in 1894.13

Among other standards under various statutes, the Civil War statute required residency of one

year. Later statutes governing naturalization through service in the Navy or Marine Corps

required service of 5 consecutive years in the Navy (the length of one tour of duty in the Navy at

that time) or service for one tour of duty in the Marine Corps. Subsequent statutes have similar

requirements with variations in the length of service required and the degree to which residency is

waived.

The total number of naturalization petitions approved tracks the overall trend in citizenship applications. For a variety

of reasons, the number of immigrants petitioning to naturalize surged in the mid-1990s, jumping from just over half a

million applicants in FY1994 to more than 1 million in FY1995. There were an unprecedented 1.6 million petitions in

FY1997, but the number had declined to 460,916 petitions in FY2000. The number of N-400 petitions filed has been

edging upward in the mid-2000s.

Executive Order 13269, Federal Register, v. 67, no. 130, July 8, 2002. Although the title of the executive order refers

to the “War on Terrorism,” the main text of the order refers to the “war against terrorists.” This report will use the term

“War on Terrorism.”

Act of July 17, 1862, ch. 200, §21, 12 Stat. 594, 597.

For a discussion of the legislative history of the various military naturalization statutes, see Darlene C. Goring, In

Service to America: Naturalization of Undocumented Alien Veterans, 31 Seton Hall L. Rev. 400, 408-430 (2000).

Act of July 26, 1894, ch. 165, 28 Stat. 124.

ȱȱȱ

řȱ

¡ȱ£ȱȱ¢ȱǱȱȱ ǰȱ¢ǰȱȱ ȱ

The early statutes required the alien to be 21 years old and waived the now-obsolete requirement

to declare one’s intent to become a citizen a certain period of time prior to filing a naturalization

application. The requirement of an honorable discharge dates from the Civil War statute. Statutes

during World War I and the Korean War permitted naturalization proceedings to take place

abroad.14 The World War I statute15 for the first time waived the fee during wartime; permitted

reenlistment only upon the condition that the alien was in the process of becoming a citizen (i.e.,

had filed a declaration of intent to naturalize); and required that a naturalization application based

on peacetime service have been filed while in regular service after reenlistment or within six

months of honorable discharge or separation from such service (which is currently the deadline

for filing) or while in reserve service after regular service. Thus, at least one term of enlistment

had to have been completed before an alien could file for naturalization during peacetime. For

Filipinos, that statute required three years of service for naturalization based on peacetime service

(which is the currently required period).

Until the Vietnam War, special provisions for wartime service were generally enacted during a

particular war and only covered service during that war, not for either past or prospective periods

of conflict. Although §329 of the INA as enacted in 1952 included World Wars I and II, it made

no provision for future periods. As a consequence, Congress enacted laws to include the Korean

War and the Vietnam War. In 1968, Congress amended §329 of the INA to provide that the

President is to designate by executive order such periods when the Armed Forces of the United

States are engaged in armed conflict with a hostile foreign force.

Not every deployment of U.S. forces to an area where armed conflict occurred has been

designated as a period of hostilities. Since the executive order designating the termination of the

Vietnam War for naturalization purposes, only two additional periods of hostilities have been

designated for such purposes. President Clinton designated the Persian Gulf Conflict as a period

of hostilities, and in 2002 President Bush designated the War on Terrorism beginning on

September 11, 2001, as a period of hostilities.16 Although President Reagan designated the

Grenada campaign as a period of hostilities, a federal court invalidated it entirely because, in

contravention of statutory guidelines for such designations, the executive order attempted to limit

the expedited naturalization benefit to persons who served in certain geographic areas and the

record showed that the President would not have designated the campaign as a period of

hostilities without the geographic limitations.17 As a result of the decision, President Clinton

revoked the earlier Grenada designation.18

Military actions in Somalia, Bosnia, Kosovo, Haiti, and Panama have not been designated as a

period of hostilities, although U.S. forces faced hostile conditions.

Special issues arose with regard to Filipinos who fought the Japanese in the Philippines (then a

U.S. territory) during World War II. Many of these veterans served in irregular units or in the

Act of May 9, 1918, 40 Stat. 542, and R.S. 1750, cross-referenced in that act; Act of June 30, 1953 (P.L. 86), ch. 162,

§2, 67 Stat. 108, 109; USCIS Interpretations 329.1(e)(2).

Act of May 9, 1918, ch. 69, 40 Stat. 542.

Executive Order 12939, Federal Register, v. 59, no. 228, November 22, 1994; and Executive Order 13269, Federal

Executive Order 12582, Federal Register, v. 52, no. 23, February 2, 1987; Matter of Reyes, 910 F. 2d 611 (9th Cir.

1990).

Executive Order 12913, 59 Federal Register, no. 89, p. 23115 (May 4, 1994).

ȱȱȱ

Śȱ

¡ȱ£ȱȱ¢ȱǱȱȱ ǰȱ¢ǰȱȱ ȱ

Philippine Army, had never had LPR status although they were U.S. nationals until Philippine

independence in 1946,19 and/or failed, because of bureaucratic policies of the time, to comply

with certain filing deadlines. After extended litigation and debate, Congress amended §329 in

1990 to address Filipino veterans of World War II.20 Such veterans were exempted from the

requirement of having been admitted to lawful permanent residence to the United States or having

enlisted or reenlisted in the United States. Subsequent amendments enabled naturalization

processing to be conducted in the Philippines. However, such special considerations only applied

to applications filed by February 2, 1995.

Special consideration was also extended to members of Hmong guerilla units that aided the U.S.

military during the Vietnam War era. The Hmong Veterans’ Naturalization Act of 200021 provided

an exemption from the English language requirement and special consideration for civics testing

for Laotian refugees who supported the U.S. Armed Forces as members of guerrilla or irregular

forces in Laos during the Vietnam War period of hostilities. These special provisions also covered

widows and spouses of such guerrilla veterans who were also admitted as Laotian refugees. The

spouses of living veterans must have been married to the veteran at the time such veteran sought

admission into the United States as a refugee. The number of beneficiaries under this statute was

limited to 45,000. The special provisions only applied to naturalization applications filed by a

veteran or spouse within three years after May 26, 2000, or by a veteran’s widow within three

years after November 1, 2000.

During the 1950s, there was a special statute authorizing naturalization for those aliens who had

enlisted outside the United States and had not been admitted to the United States as LPRs.

Popularly known as the Lodge Act,22 it was originally enacted in 1950 and was periodically

extended during the 1950s, finally expiring on July 1, 1959. Notwithstanding that service was not

during a specified period of hostilities, the act authorized naturalization under §329 of an alien

who enlisted or reenlisted overseas under the terms of the act; subsequently entered the United

States, American Samoa, Swains Island, or the Canal Zone pursuant to military orders; completed

five years of service; and was honorably discharged. Such an alien was deemed lawfully admitted

for permanent residence for the purposes of naturalization under §329.

Prior to the current statute concerning posthumous citizenship for persons who die as a result of

active-duty service during periods of hostilities, there was no public law for posthumous

conferral. Posthumous grants of citizenship were accomplished through private laws for specific

individuals. These private laws usually specified that no immigration benefit accrued to the

At the time the United States acquired the Philippines, Philippine natives were given the option of affirming

allegiance to the Spanish empire and remaining Spanish nationals, or becoming U.S. nationals by default. However,

Filipinos were never collectively granted U.S. citizenship. Pursuant to a U.S. statute accepted by the Philippine

legislature in 1934, a 10-year transition period was to culminate in Philippine independence and the termination of U.S.

nationality for Philippine citizens who had not acquired U.S. citizenship. During that period, Filipinos were considered

U.S. nationals owing allegiance to the United States, yet the Philippines were considered a foreign country for

immigration purposes with an immigration quota of 50. Japanese occupation during World War II disrupted this period

and the Philippines were ultimately granted independence in 1946, whereupon the U.S. nationality of Philippine

citizens who had not otherwise previously acquired U.S. citizenship was terminated.

P.L. 101-649, §405, 104 Stat. 5039 (1990), described as amended as a note to INA §329 (8 U.S.C. §1440).

P.L. 106-207, 114 Stat. 316 (2000), codified as amended as a note to INA §312 (8 U.S.C. §1423).

Act of June 30, 1950, 64 Stat. 316.

ȱȱȱ

śȱ

¡ȱ£ȱȱ¢ȱǱȱȱ ǰȱ¢ǰȱȱ ȱ

surviving immediate relatives as a result of the posthumous grant. Authority to grant posthumous

citizenship was added by the Posthumous Citizenship for Active Duty Service Act of 1989.23

£ȱȱȱ¢ȱ

Prior to Operation Iraqi Freedom, in February 2003, there were a total of 57,754 foreign nationals

serving in the U.S. Armed Forces. Of these, over 37,000 noncitizens served among the 1.4 million

persons in active duty status in the Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marines, or 2.6% of those in

active duty. Almost 12,000 other foreign nationals were serving in the Selected Reserves, and

another 8,000 were serving in the Inactive National Guard and Individual Ready Reserves. As

Figure 2 illustrates, the Navy had the largest number of foreign nationals (15,845 or 27.8% of all

noncitizens in military), followed by the selected reserves (11,861 or 20.8%) and the Army

(11,523 or 20.2%).

By 2007, there was a shift of foreign nationals in the service areas, as well as a decrease in the

total number serving. In terms of the Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marines, the number of foreign

nationals had fallen to 21,752 serving in active duty as of March 2007.24 However, the other

service areas had increased to 23,285 foreign nationals serving in the Reserves, the Inactive

National Guard, and Individual Ready Reserves. As Figure 2 illustrates, the Navy has the largest

number of foreign nationals (36% of all noncitizens in the military), followed by the National

Guard (21%), with the Reserves and the Marines each comprising 15%.

Figure 2. Noncitizens in the U.S. Military

by Service Area: 2003 and 2007

Source: CRS analysis of DOD data.

This shift is likely due to several factors, most notably the number of foreign nationals who

became citizens since 2003 and a deplenished number of foreign nationals eligible to serve.

§2(a) of P.L. 101-249, 104 Stat. 94 (1990).

These DOD data are approximate since current citizenship status is not reported for every service member. The data

are from the DRS #17612 Active Duty Master Files and Reserve Duty Master Files.

ȱȱȱ

Ŝȱ

¡ȱ£ȱȱ¢ȱǱȱȱ ǰȱ¢ǰȱȱ ȱ

Foreign nationals from the Philippines appear to comprise the largest single country of citizenship

for aliens in the armed forces in 2007, although the DOD does not have native country data for

about 25,000 foreign nationals in the military and does not have citizenship data for almost

22,000 foreign nationals in the military.25 Mexico is the second largest source country, followed

by Jamaica, Dominican Republic, and Haiti. The top ten source countries are rounded out by

Colombia, El Salvador, Trinidad and Tobago, Peru, and Guyana, as Figure 3 depicts. These may

be compared with the countries of citizenship for foreign nationals in the Armed Forces in 2003.

Then, as in 2007, foreign nationals from the Philippines comprised the largest single country of

citizenship for aliens in the Armed Forces, although the DOD did not have citizenship data for

about 11,000 foreign nationals in the military. Mexico was the second largest source country,

followed by Jamaica, El Salvador, and Haiti. The top ten source countries were rounded out by

Trinidad and Tobago, Colombia, South Korea, and Peru.

.Top Ten Countries of Countries of Citizenship

for Noncitizens in the U.S. Armed Forces

Figure 3

Philippines

Mexico

2003

Jamaica

2007

Dominican Republic

El Salvador

Haiti

Trinidad/Tobago

Colombia

S. Korea

Peru

Guyana

Source:

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

CRS analysis of DOD data as of November 2007.

As one might expect given the distribution of foreign born in the United States, California leads

as the accession location state—13.90% of all aliens in the military. New York (7.99%), Florida

(5.82%), and Texas (4.37%) follow. As Figure 4 presents, the remainder of the top 10 states are

New Jersey, Illinois, Maryland, Virginia, Massachusetts, and Washington. The state that is the

accession location is not necessarily the state in which the alien has resided for the longest period

of time or where his or her family lives. The accession location state is the place where the alien’s

unit is located. Appendix A lists the number of aliens whose unit is located in each state.

It is unclear what accounts for this substantial under-reporting of citizenship status; it may be due in part to foreign

nationals in the military who have petitions pending with USCIS as well as foreign nationals who are part of

households with mixed immigrant and citizenship statuses.

ȱȱȱ

ŝȱ

¡ȱ£ȱȱ¢ȱǱȱȱ ǰȱ¢ǰȱȱ ȱ

Figure 4.

Top Ten States of Noncitizens in the U.S. Armed Forces, 2006

California

5,806

3,338

New York

Florida

2,430

Texas

1,825

New Jersey

1,250

Illinois

579

Maryland

519

Virginia

499

Massachusetts

472

Washington

379

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

Source: CRS analysis of DOD data as of January 2006.

ȱ ȱ

There are currently two sections of the INA that provide for expedited naturalization based on

military service, during peace time and during war time (“a period of hostilities”), and one section

that provides for posthumous naturalization based on military service. Another provision permits

the immediate relatives of a U.S. citizen who died as a result of active-duty service during a

period of hostilities to be naturalized without being subject to any specific required residency or

physical presence in the United States. These provisions are discussed below. A USCIS fact sheet

on military naturalizations (March 16, 2008) is available at http://www.uscis.gov/files/article/

mil_natz_051608.pdf.

£ȱȱȱȱȱ

Section 328 of the INA (8 U.S.C. §1439) provides for expedited naturalization through military

service during peacetime. The current administrative view is that service does not have to be in

active-duty status and may include service in an inactive reserve unit, including a federally

recognized National Guard organization.26 Fees for naturalization are waived based on this

provision. The following conditions apply to naturalization under this provision:

•

The applicant must have served at least one year (three years before P.L. 108136) in aggregate and must file the naturalization application while still in the

service or within six months of leaving the service.

USCIS Interpretations §328.1(b)(4)(iii).

ȱȱȱ

Şȱ

¡ȱ£ȱȱ¢ȱǱȱȱ ǰȱ¢ǰȱȱ ȱ

•

There must be current honorable service or a subsequent honorable discharge.

Naturalization may be revoked if the service member is discharged under other

than honorable conditions before serving honorably for a five-year period in

aggregate (unlike §329, before P.L. 108-136, this section did not provide for

discretionary revocation in the event of discharge under other than honorable

conditions).

•

The usual specified periods of residence or physical presence in the United

States, a state, or immigration district are not required in order to file an

application. No current residence within a particular state or immigration district

is required.

•

Other naturalization requirements must be satisfied, including good moral

character, allegiance to the United States and its Constitution, knowledge of

civics and English, etc.

•

Lawful admission to permanent residence, as required under the INA for

naturalization, may occur before, during, or after the qualifying military service;

however, current enlistment requirements permit only a citizen or LPR to enlist.

•

The provision of 8 U.S.C. §1429 prohibiting naturalization of a person subject to

a final order of removal is waived.

•

Where qualifying military service periods were not continuous, the requirements

for naturalization, including residency, must be proved for any non-service

intervals within five years before the date the naturalization application was filed.

£ȱȱȬ¢ȱȱȱ ȱ

Section 329 of the INA (8 U.S.C. §1440) provides for expedited naturalization through U.S.

military service during designated periods of hostilities. The periods of hostilities designated in

the statute or by executive order pursuant to the statute include World War I, World War II, the

Korean War, the Vietnam War, the Persian Gulf Conflict, and the so-called War on Terrorism; as

noted above, the Grenada campaign was briefly designated and the designation revoked pursuant

to a court holding of unconstitutionality. Fees for naturalization are waived. The conditions for

eligibility include the following:

•

The applicant must have served in active-duty status in the U.S. Armed Forces or

in the Selected Reserve of the Ready Reserves during a designated period of

hostilities. No specified period of service is required prior to application.

•

There must be honorable service and discharge. Naturalization may be revoked if

the service member is discharged under other than honorable conditions before

the person has served honorably for an aggregate period of five years, but such

revocation arguably raises constitutional issues (before P.L. 108-136,

naturalization under this section could be revoked if the service member was

discharged under other than honorable conditions at any time after

naturalization).

•

No specified period of residence in the United States prior to application is

required. No current residence or physical presence within the United States, a

particular state, or immigration district is required.

ȱȱȱ

şȱ

¡ȱ£ȱȱ¢ȱǱȱȱ ǰȱ¢ǰȱȱ ȱ

•

Other naturalization requirements must be satisfied, including good moral

character, allegiance to the United States and its Constitution, knowledge of

civics and English, etc.

•

The service member must have either (1) been in the United States or a U.S.

territory or on board a U.S. public vessel at the time of enlistment, whether or not

the enlistee was a LPR, or (2) been admitted as a LPR after enlistment.

•

The provision of 8 U.S.C. §1429 prohibiting naturalization of a person subject to

a final order of removal is waived.

•

An applicant may be naturalized regardless of age (i.e., a minor serving in the

military may naturalize of his/her own accord under this provision).

Section 3 of P.L. 90-633, 82 Stat. 1344 (1968), found at 8 U.S.C. §1440e, waives the fees for a

naturalization application made under §329 of the INA based on active-duty service during the

Vietnam War or subsequently designated periods of hostilities, but only if such application is

made during the period of hostilities.27 This waiver appears to date back to a World War I statute

that waived fees during wartime for applications based on military service during that war. P.L.

108-136 amended INA §329 to prohibit fees for naturalization under that section; however, 8

U.S.C. §1440e was not repealed.

The definition of “active-duty” under this provision is determined by the service branch of the

Armed Forces in which the noncitizen served, pursuant to the statutory definition in Title 10 of

the U.S. Code, concerning the Armed Forces.28 According to this definition, “active-duty” does

not include inactive service in a reserve unit or inactive or non-federalized active service in a

National Guard unit.29 Active-duty service need not be in a combatant capacity.30 The service

branch also determines whether the service was honorable and whether the applicant was

honorably discharged. The service branch provides a duly authenticated certification of the

relevant particulars of the applicant’s military service.

ȱ£ȱȱȱ¢ȱȱ

Section 329A of the INA (8 U.S.C. §1440-1) provides for posthumous naturalization where death

resulted from serving while on active-duty during World War I, World War II, the Korean War, the

Vietnam War, or other designated periods of hostilities. Before this addition to the INA,

posthumous citizenship could only be granted via the enactment of private legislation. As

originally enacted, the next-of-kin or other representative had to file a request for posthumous

citizenship within two years of the date of enactment (March 6, 1990) for past hostilities or of the

death of the noncitizen member of the Armed Forces for periods of hostilities after the date of

enactment. Many persons who would have requested posthumous citizenship for an eligible

individual did not learn about this provision until after the deadline regarding persons who died

during past hostilities, and legislation was enacted in the 107th Congress to extend the deadline.31

See also INA §344(d), codified as amended at 8 U.S.C. §1455(d).

10 U.S.C. §101(d).

For more information on the reserve components, see CRS Report RL30802, Reserve Component Personnel Issues:

Questions and Answers, by (name redacted).

USCIS Interpretations §329.1(c)(4)(iv).

P.L. 107-273, §11030, 116 Stat. 1836 (2002).

ȱȱȱ

ŗŖȱ

¡ȱ£ȱȱ¢ȱǱȱȱ ǰȱ¢ǰȱȱ ȱ

P.L. 108-136 further expedited the procedures. The conditions for a posthumous grant include the

following:

•

The deceased must have served honorably in an active-duty status in the U.S.

military during World War I, World War II, the Korean War, the Vietnam War, or

other designated periods of hostilities under §329 of the INA.

•

Death was a result of injury or disease incurred in or aggravated by service

during a period of hostilities.

•

The deceased must have either (1) been in the United States or a U.S. territory or

on board a U.S. public vessel at the time of enlistment, whether or not the

enlistee was a LPR, or (2) been admitted as a LPR after enlistment.

A request for posthumous citizenship may be filed by the Secretary of Defense or the Secretary’s

designee (after locating the next-of-kin and at their request) or by the next-of-kin or other

representative.32 The USCIS/DHS shall approve such a request if:

•

The request was filed by November 24, 2005, or is filed within two years of the

death of the service member, whichever is later.

•

The service branch under which the person served certifies that the person served

honorably in an active-duty status during a designated period of hostilities and

died because of such service.

•

The USCIS finds that the person either enlisted in the United States or its

territories or on board a U.S. public vessel or was admitted as a LPR after

enlistment.

Documentation of a posthumous grant of citizenship is sent to the next-of-kin or representative

who requested the grant. Essentially, posthumous citizenship is a symbolic honor accorded

noncitizens who gave their lives in defense of the United States and has no automatic substantive

effect per se on the immigration status of surviving family. However, provisions in P.L. 108-136

extended benefits to the surviving family members of service members who died as a result of

active duty service during a period of hostilities. There is no fee for a posthumous citizenship

application.

ȱȱȱȱ¢ȱȱ¢ȱȱ

Prior to P.L. 108-136, INA §319(d) (8 U.S.C. §1430(d)) provided for the naturalization of the

surviving spouse of a U.S. citizen who died while serving honorably in an active-duty status in

the Armed Forces of the United States. The spouse and U.S. citizen service member must have

been living in marital union at the time of the citizen’s death. All the other usual requirements for

The “next-of-kin” and “other representative” are both defined in current regulations. The next-of-kin means the

closest surviving blood or legal relative of the decedent in the following order of succession: 1) the surviving spouse; 2)

the surviving child or children if there is no surviving spouse; 3) the surviving parent(s) if there is no surviving spouse

or child; 4) the surviving siblings if there is no surviving spouse, child, or parent. Other representative includes the

following: 1) the executor or administrator of the decedent’s estate, including a special administrator appointed for the

purpose of requesting posthumous naturalization; 2) the guardian, conservator or committee of the next-of-kin; 3) a

service organization listed in 38 U.S.C. §3402, chartered by Congress or a State, or recognized by the Department of

Veterans Affairs. 8 C.F.R. §392.1.

ȱȱȱ

ŗŗȱ

¡ȱ£ȱȱ¢ȱǱȱȱ ǰȱ¢ǰȱȱ ȱ

naturalization applied except that no prior residency or physical presence in the United States, a

state, or immigration district was required to file a naturalization application.

Section 1703 of P.L. 108-136, Div. A, expanded the scope of the naturalization benefit to the

children and parents of a U.S. citizen who dies during a period of honorable service in an active

duty status in the U.S. Armed Forces and expressly included service members who died on or

after September 11, 2001, and were granted posthumous citizenship. This provision also extended

other benefits to surviving immediate relatives, codified at notes under 8 U.S.C. §1151. The

surviving spouse, children and parents of a U.S. citizen who served honorably in an active duty

status in the U.S. Armed Forces and died as a result of injury or disease incurred in or aggravated

by combat may self-petition as immediate relatives within two years of the citizen’s death and

adjust status to lawful permanent residency. The parent of such a citizen may be considered an

immediate relative regardless of whether the citizen had attained 21 years of age. Certain

immigration benefits are also available to the spouses, children, and parents of aliens who served

honorably in an active duty status in the U.S. Armed Forces, died as a result of injury or disease

incurred in or aggravated by combat, and were granted posthumous citizenship. They may

continue to be considered immediate relatives if a family petition was filed by the alien before

his/her death; self-petition for classification as a family-based immigrant within two years of

either the date of the service member’s death or the date on which posthumous citizenship is

granted (exactly which is unclear) if such petition was not filed before the alien’s death; and

adjust status to lawful permanent residency. Certain grounds of inadmissibility are waived for

these purposes.

See section Legislation in the 110th Congress, infra, for a discussion of recently enacted laws

benefitting the family of military service members.

ȱȱ ȱȱ ȱ

£ȱȱ

Those who have requested exemption from selective service registration or a draft, or discharge

on grounds of alienage or noncitizenship,33 are generally barred from naturalization.34 Those who

have deserted from the Armed Forces or evaded the draft are also explicitly barred from

naturalization;35 they may possibly be otherwise barred for failing to satisfy the requirement of

Between 1918 and 1971, selective service laws permitted any alien to request exemption from military service

obligation in exchange for permanent ineligibility to naturalize, which persisted even if the alien subsequently changed

his mind and served honorably in the U.S. Armed Forces during a period of hostilities. In 1971, the laws were amended

to permit only nonimmigrant aliens to be exempt. Additionally, treaties between the United States and certain countries

exempt each country’s nationals from military service in the other country. See 8 C.F.R. Part 315; Charles Gordon, et

al., Immigration Law and Procedure, §95.04[2][e] (2007); Captain Samuel Bettwy, Assisting Soldiers in Immigration

Matters, 1992 Army Law. 3, 10 (1992).

INA §315 (8 U.S.C. §1426). According to USCIS Interpretations 329.1(d), the administration formerly interpreted

this section as barring naturalization even where the federal government initiated the discharge and the service was

otherwise honorable. However, the USCIS now follows the holding in In re Watson, 502 F. Supp. 145 (D.D.C. 1980),

that the disqualification does not apply where the federal government, not the alien, sought the discharge on alienage

grounds for its convenience. In this case, a nonimmigrant alien was mistakenly permitted to enlist in the National

Guard and was eventually discharged when the error was discovered, despite having served on active-duty during the

Vietnam War period.

INA §314 (8 U.S.C. §1425).

ȱȱȱ

ŗŘȱ

¡ȱ£ȱȱ¢ȱǱȱȱ ǰȱ¢ǰȱȱ ȱ

good moral character or for being dishonorably discharged or disciplined, which would tend to

show lack of good moral character.36 The bar is permanent, and even if a draft evader

subsequently enlists and serves honorably, he is barred absent an act of Congress or a grant of

amnesty by the President removing the bar.37 Similarly, a conviction for desertion would have to

be vacated or pardoned in some manner to remove the naturalization bar.38

ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ

Although under federal statutes and regulations LPRs may enlist in the active and reserve forces

of the military,39 there are certain restrictions with regard to reenlistment and eligibility for certain

ranks and occupations. By statute, only U.S. citizens are eligible for certain officer

commissions.40 Additionally, positions requiring security clearance are generally restricted to U.S.

citizens. The major exception to the citizenship restrictions concerns citizens of the Federated

States of Micronesia or the Republic of the Marshall Islands, who may serve in the U.S. Armed

Forces pursuant to the Compacts of Free Association between the United States and those

countries, under which the United States provides for the defense of those countries;41 since those

countries do not maintain their own armed forces, their citizens who serve in the U.S. Armed

Forces in effect are serving in the defense of their own countries. Additionally, the Secretary of

the relevant service branch may authorize the enlistment of other aliens if the Secretary

determines that it is vital to the national interest. On December 5, 2008, the Secretary of Defense

authorized a pilot program (called Military Accessions Vital to the National Interest (MAVNI))

for the recruitment and enlistment of certain nonimmigrant aliens, asylees, refugees, and aliens

with temporary protected status, whose skills are considered to be vital to the national interest.42

Those with critical skills – physicians, nurses, and certain experts in language with associated

cultural backgrounds – would be eligible. To determine its value in enhancing military readiness,

Bettwy, supra note 33, at 14.

Charles Gordon et al., supra note 33, at §95.04[2][d]; Bettwy, supra note 33, at 10-11.

Bettwy, supra note 33, at 11.

10 U.S.C. §§504 and 12102; see also DOD Instruction No. 1304.26, E2.2.2.1 & E2.2.2.2 (September 20, 2005)

(hereafter cited as DOD Instruction). The statutes concern enlistment in the Army, Air Force, and Reserve components.

Although no statute restricts enlistment to citizens and LPRs in the Navy and Marine Corps, they usually apply similar

citizenship requirements; see Department of the Navy, COMNAVCRUITCOMINST 1130.8F, Navy Recruiting

Manual-Enlisted, Chapter 2D (March 11, 2002), and MCO P1100.72C, Military Procurement Manual, Vol. 2, Enlisted

Procurement, §3221 (February 10, 2004).

10 U.S.C. §§532, 12201; see also, DOD Instruction at E2.2.2.3. U.S. citizenship is required to be a commissioned or

warrant officer, except for a reserve appointment, for which a person must have LPR status. National Guard officers

must be U.S. citizens under 32 U.S.C. §313. 10 U.S.C. §532(f) authorizes the Secretary of Defense to exempt LPRs and

U.S. noncitizen nationals from this requirement if national security requires, but only for an original appointment in a

grade below the grade of major or lieutenant commander.

Section 341 in each of the following: the Compact of Free Association between the Federated States of Micronesia

and the United States, P.L. 108-188, §201(a), 117 Stat. 2784 (48 U.S.C. 1921 note); the Compact of Free Association

between the Republic of the Marshall Islands and the United States, §201(b), 117 Stat. 2823 (48 U.S.C. 1921 note); the

Compact of Free Association between Palau and the United States, P.L. 99-658, §201, 100 Stat. 3678 (48 U.S.C. 1931

note). Also see, Department of the Army, Regular Army and Army Reserve Enlistment Program/Army Regulation 601210, §2-4.a(4) (June 7, 2007) (hereinafter 2007 Army Regulation 601-210).

See news release at http://www.defenselink.mil/releases/release.aspx?releaseid=12384 and fact sheet at

http://www.defenselink.mil/news/MAVNI-Fact-Sheet.pdf. See also the USCIS final rule, Employment Authorization

and Verification of Aliens Enlisting in the Armed Forces, 74 Fed. Reg. 7993 (Feb. 23, 2009) (extending employment

authorization and verification to aliens enlisting under the MAVNI program) and Margaret D. Stock, Ten Things That

Immigration Lawyers Should Know About the Army’s New Non-Citizen Recruiting Program, available at

http://drop.io/hf4xwak/asset/stock-mavni-2-22-09-pdf#.

ȱȱȱ

ŗřȱ

¡ȱ£ȱȱ¢ȱǱȱȱ ǰȱ¢ǰȱȱ ȱ

the limited pilot program is to recruit up to 1,000 people, and will continue for a period of up to

12 months.

Certain occupations requiring security clearance such as intelligence operations and special

forces, require U.S. citizenship,43 in some instances, not just of the service member, but of

immediate family members;44 dual citizenship is a negative or prohibitive factor.45 Until recently,

some service branches restricted the amount of time that a noncitizen could serve.46

The Air Force restricts noncitizens to one term of enlistment: they cannot reenlist unless they

have become a citizen, but an extension of the original enlistment is available to an airman who

has filed an application for naturalization.47 The extension may not exceed the earlier of (1) six

months or (2) the date of the expected naturalization ceremony plus 30 days. However, additional

extensions may be granted.

Apparently there are no explicit statutory or regulatory restrictions on reenlistment in the Navy or

the Marine Corps.

Although it is a component of the Armed Forces,48 the Coast Guard is not generally under the

jurisdiction of the DOD, but rather formerly under the Department of Transportation and now

under DHS, which promulgates the regulations governing enlistment. As a component of the

Armed Forces, the Coast Guard is subject to the uniform enlistment statute regarding citizenship

and LPR restrictions.49 The Coast Guard regulations require U.S. citizenship or LPR status for

enlistment;50 an alien must have become a naturalized citizen to reenlist.51 Nonimmigrants may

not enlist. LPRs with any prior military service may not enlist; this restriction may not be waived.

Noncitizens in the Coast Guard are not eligible to be officers.52 Although the current Coast Guard

security manual concerning security clearance apparently does not expressly require U.S.

citizenship, it refers to federal mandated guidelines and to the manual’s explicit compliance with

federal guidelines and provides that in cases of apparent conflict between the manual and statutes,

See DOD Directive 5200.2, DOD Personnel Security Program, §§3.4 and 3.6 (April 9, 1999) and generally DOD

5200.2-R, Personnel Security Program Regulation (January 1, 1987), issued under DOD Directive 5200.2.

2007 Army Regulation 601-210, §5-56; Department of the Army, Personnel Security Program/Army Regulation 38067, §3-501 (September 9, 1988).

32 C.F.R. §§154.7(f), 154.16(f), Part 154, Appendix H, Guideline C; see e.g., 2007 Army Regulation 601-210, §24.e.

Formerly, the Army limited a service member to eight years of service in noncitizen status. If a person reached the

eight-year limit by the end of the current term of enlistment, that person was barred from reenlisting. Department of the

Army, formerly at Regular Army and Army Reserve Enlistment Program/Army Regulation 601-210, §§2-4.a.(5), 3-4.b

(February 28, 1995); rescinded in the June 7, 2007, version. The enlistment term could be extended for a maximum of

12 months to allow the service member sufficient time to complete naturalization procedures, but not more than 90

days beyond the expected date of the naturalization ceremony. Formerly at Department of the Army, Army Regulation

601-280, Army Retention Program, §4-9.k (March 31, 1999); substance deleted from current version (June 31, 2006).

Secretary of the Air Force, Air Force Instruction 36-2606, Reenlistment in the United States Air Force, paragraphs

3.12, 4.5.4 (November 21, 2001).

10 U.S.C. §101(a)(4).

10 U.S.C. §504.

U.S. Coast Guard of the DHS, Coast Guard Recruiting Manual (COMDTINST M1100.2E) §2.B.1.d and Table 2-2

(June 22, 2006). (Hereinafter cited as CG Recruiting Manual).

U.S. Coast Guard of the DHS, Coast Guard Personnel Manual (COMDTINST M1000.6A) §1.G.5.5 (June 18, 2007).

This does not apply to a service member who originally enlisted from the Philippines.

U.S. Coast Guard of the DHS, Coast Guard Recruiting Manual (COMDTINST M1100.2E) §4.B.1.f (June 22, 2006).

ȱȱȱ

ŗŚȱ

¡ȱ£ȱȱ¢ȱǱȱȱ ǰȱ¢ǰȱȱ ȱ

law enforcement practices, and other regulations, the latter regulations shall apply and the

Commandant should be advised of the apparent conflict for resolution.53

Despite the foregoing restrictions, nonimmigrant and even undocumented (i.e., “illegal”) aliens

have apparently enlisted in the military at times when they were not authorized to enlist.54

¡ȱ£ȱȱ¡¢ȱȱȱȱ¢ȱ

Although not enacted to benefit U.S. military service members, expedited naturalization for

extraordinary contributions to national security under 8 U.S.C. §1427(f) may have relevance in

the context of aliens who provide valuable military intelligence during the so-called War on

Terrorism. Legislative history indicates that this provision is primarily intended to benefit those

aliens who have provided invaluable intelligence in the course of a long-term relationship with

the United States.55 This provision permits a maximum of five aliens per year to be naturalized

upon a determination by the Director of National Intelligence/Director of the Central Intelligence

Agency, the Secretary of Homeland Security, and the Director of USCIS56 that such aliens have

made an extraordinary contribution to national security or intelligence activities. The Director of

National Intelligence/Director of the Central Intelligence Agency must inform the congressional

committees on Intelligence and the Judiciary prior to the filing of an application under this

provision. The usual residence and physical presence requirements are waived, but the alien must

be otherwise eligible for naturalization and have continuously resided in the United States for one

year prior to naturalization. The alien must also not have participated in persecution, serious

crimes, or terrorism, or be a danger to the security of the United States. The naturalization

ceremony may take place in any federal district court regardless of residency, and the conduct of

naturalization proceedings must be consistent with the protection of intelligence activities.

ȱ ȱ

Section 101(a)(27)(K) of the INA (8 U.S.C. §1101(a)(27)(K)) defines “special immigrant” as

including an immigrant who has served honorably on active duty in the Armed Forces of the

United States after October 15, 1978, and after original lawful enlistment outside the United

States (under a treaty or agreement in effect on the date of the enactment of this subparagraph,

October 1, 1991) for a period or periods aggregating (1) 12 years and who, if separated from such

U.S. Coast Guard of the DHS, Personnel Security and Suitability Program (COMDTINST M5520.12C) preamble

§4.c & d (December 17, 2007).

E.g., In re Watson, 502 F. Supp. 145 (D.D.C. 1980), supra note 34, involving a nonimmigrant mistakenly permitted

to enlist in the National Guard, contrary to enlistment rules.

See H.Rept. 99-373, at 22 (1985)—

The conferees expect that the authority provided by Subsection 316(g) will be used to reward those

aliens who for a significant time have maintained a relationship with the United States. Only in rare

instances should expedited citizenship be afforded to defectors with no previous relationship with

the United States, and only after careful scrutiny should the promise of expedited citizenship be

offered as an inducement for future services.... The conferees emphasize that private immigration

legislation remains the preferred method for processing exceptions to [the INA].... the Executive

Branch should, in each case, determine whether a private bill or use of the waiver authority

provided for in subsection 316(g) is most appropriate.

This statute still refers to the Director of Central Intelligence, the Attorney General, and the Commissioner of

Immigration, although these positions have either been renamed or have had functions transferred pursuant to statutory

amendments.

ȱȱȱ

ŗśȱ

¡ȱ£ȱȱ¢ȱǱȱȱ ǰȱ¢ǰȱȱ ȱ

service, was never separated except under honorable conditions, or (2) six years, in the case of an

immigrant who is on active duty at the time of seeking special immigrant status and who has

reenlisted to incur a total active duty service obligation of at least 12 years. This provision also

includes the spouse or child of any such immigrant if accompanying or following to join the

immigrant, but only if the executive department under which the immigrant serves or served

recommends the granting of special immigrant status to the immigrant. Such special immigrants

may be paroled into the United States and adjust status; given the length of service, even under

peace-time military naturalization provisions, service members who are special immigrants in this

category would likely qualify for naturalization. According to immigration authorities, this

provision benefits nationals of the Philippines, Micronesia, the Marshall Islands, and Palau, all of

which have the type of agreement to which the statute refers, and apparently primarily benefits

Philippine nationals in the U.S. Navy.57

ȱ ȱ

ȱ ¢ȱ

The following overview of legislative activity since the beginning of the War on Terrorism on

September 11, 2001, may provide guidance for future legislation based on the types of legislation

that have been considered but have not yet been enacted, as well as those that have already been

enacted. There continues to be congressional interest in further streamlining and expediting the

naturalization process for military personnel and in providing immigration benefits specifically

for immediate relatives of such personnel.

ǯǯȱŗŖŞȬŗřŜȱ

P.L. 108-136, the Defense Department FY2004 Authorization bill (H.R. 1588), was the

culmination of congressional efforts begun in the 107th Congress. During the 107th Congress,

there was renewed legislative interest in amending the various naturalization provisions based on

military service as a result of the Bush Administration’s launching of the War on Terrorism, the

campaign in Afghanistan, and the prospect of an armed confrontation in Iraq. This interest

continued in the 108th Congress and developed momentum in the wake of Operation Iraqi

Freedom.

Of the many bills introduced during the 108th Congress that contained provisions concerning

expedited or posthumous citizenship as the result of military service, H.R. 1588, the National

Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004, became P.L. 108-136 on November 24, 2003.

Title XVII of H.R. 1588, entitled “Naturalization and Other Immigration Benefits for Military

Personnel and Families,” amended existing military naturalization statutes by:

•

reducing the period of service required for naturalization based on peacetime

service from three years to one year;

Charles Gordon et al., supra note 33, at §35.10, State Dept. Authorizes Special Immigrant Status for Members of

Armed Forces, 68 Interpreter Releases 1572 (1991).

ȱȱȱ

ŗŜȱ

¡ȱ£ȱȱ¢ȱǱȱȱ ǰȱ¢ǰȱȱ ȱ

•

waiving fees for naturalization based on military service during peacetime or

wartime;

•

permitting discretionary revocation of naturalization granted on or after the date

of enactment through peacetime or wartime service if the citizen were discharged

from military service under other than honorable conditions before serving

honorably for an aggregate period of five years;

•

permitting naturalization processing overseas in U.S. embassies, consulates, and

military bases;

•

providing for priority consideration for military leave and transport to finalize

naturalization;

•

extending naturalization based on wartime service to members of the Selected

Reserve of the Ready Reserve.

Additionally, the Secretary of Defense or the Secretary’s designee within the USCIS is authorized

to request posthumous citizenship immediately upon obtaining permission from the next-of-kin.

The law also expanded immigration benefits available to the immediate relatives of citizens,

including posthumous citizens, who die from injuries or illnesses resulting from or aggravated by

serving in combat. Such relatives may remain classified as immediate relatives of a U.S. citizen

for immigration purposes, notwithstanding the death of the service member, and can self-petition

for immigrant status. To qualify for such treatment, immediate relatives must self-petition within

two years of the date of the service member’s death or, in the case of posthumous citizens, within

two years of the date on which posthumous citizenship is granted.58 Certain adjustment

requirements and the public charge grounds for inadmissibility are waived. Children and parents,

as well as spouses, of U.S. citizens who died during honorable active-duty service are eligible to

naturalize without prior residence or a specified period of physical presence in the United States.

This includes survivors of posthumous citizens who died on or after September 11, 2001.

References to the Attorney General in the relevant sections of the INA Act were changed to

references to the Secretary of Homeland Security. The effective date of the provisions is

retroactive to September 11, 2001, except for the fee waivers and provision for naturalization

proceedings abroad, which took effect on October 1, 2004.

ȱȱȱȱŗŖŞ ȱȱ

After the enactment of P.L. 108-136, other bills were introduced that would have further

expedited naturalization based on military service or linked military service to immigration

benefits. H.R. 4873, the Active Duty Naturalization Accommodation Act of 2004, would have

provided additional flexibility in the naturalization process to enable applicants in active-duty

status abroad to satisfy the procedural requirements. Any requirement or deadline for

naturalization would have been suspended for a service member stationed abroad in active duty

service, until the service member had had at least 30 days after his or her return to the United

States to comply with the requirement or deadline. This relief could have been waived by the

service member. Similar relief would have been retroactive for those service members who were

stationed abroad in active duty service between September 11, 2001, and the effective date of

USCIS Adjudicator’s Field Manual, §21.11(a)(2)(A)(ii) and 21.11(a)(2)(B).

ȱȱȱ

ŗŝȱ

¡ȱ£ȱȱ¢ȱǱȱȱ ǰȱ¢ǰȱȱ ȱ

H.R. 4873, had it been enacted. H.R. 3928/H.R. 4532 would have permitted U.S. nationals, that

is, non-citizen nationals (American Samoans) to attend military service academies and receive

Reserve Officers’ Training Corps (ROTC) scholarships on condition that they naturalize before

graduation. S. 1545 and title XVIII of S. 2863, the Development, Relief, and Education for Alien

Minors Act of 2007 (the DREAM Act), would have provided that two years of military service

may satisfy one of the requirements for achieving full-fledged LPR status after being in

conditional LPR status.

ȱȱȱŗŖş ȱȱ

Section 542 of P.L. 109-16359 amended 10 U.S.C. 504 and repealed 10 U.S.C. §§3253, 8253 to

establish uniform standards for enlistment in the several Armed Forces service branches. Aside

from LPRs, the only foreign nationals permitted to enlist are nationals of the former Trust

Territories, Micronesia, the Marshall Islands, and Palau, which all have Compacts of Free

Association with the United States providing that the United States will provide defense for those

countries and that their nationals may enlist in the U.S. defense forces. The Secretary of the

relevant service branch may authorize the enlistment of others if the Secretary determines that

such enlistment is vital to the national interest.

Sections in Title VII of the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2006 (S. 2611/S. 2612) as

passed by the Senate would have built on the expansion of expedited naturalization and other

citizenship-related benefits for aliens serving in the U.S. military enacted by Title XVII of P.L.

108-136. Among other things, §§711 to 715, the Kendell Frederick Citizenship Assistance Act,

would have waived the fingerprint requirement for members of the Armed Forces who were

fingerprinted by the DOD upon enlistment if they submit a naturalization application within 12

months of enlistment. Similar legislative proposals included other versions of the Kendell

Frederick Citizenship Assistance Act (H.R. 4533, S. 2097, S. 2165) and the Soldiers to Citizens

Act (S. 3947). Section 751 of S. 2611/S. 2612 would have provided that aliens shall not be denied

the opportunity to serve in the U.S. Armed Forces, and that, during a period of hostilities, aliens

may be granted U.S. citizenship after at least two years of honorable and satisfactory service on

active duty and have other requirements waived, if they file an application, demonstrate English

and civics knowledge and good moral character to their chain of command, and take the oath of

allegiance. Similar legislative proposals were included in the Soldiers to Citizens Act (S. 3947)

and the Riayan Tejada Memorial Act of 2005 (H.R. 661, based on service in a combat zone). The

Bruce Vento Hmong Veterans’ Naturalization Act of 2005 (H.R. 3018) would have amended the

Hmong Veterans Naturalization Act of 2000 by eliminating the deadline for applying for

naturalization.

H.R. 3911 would have further expedited military-service-based naturalization during peacetime

by providing that the requirements for English and civics knowledge, good moral character and

allegiance to the United States and its constitutional principles do not apply; by eliminating any

required specific period of service; and by permitting a veteran to apply for such naturalization at

any time, not just within six months of termination of service.

Several bills would have provided immigration benefits to the spouses and children of U.S.

citizen military personnel and veterans. In addition to provisions expediting military

naturalizations, H.R. 661 would have provided certain immigration benefits for the spouses

Div. A, §542, 119 Stat. 3253 (2006).

ȱȱȱ

ŗŞȱ

¡ȱ£ȱȱ¢ȱǱȱȱ ǰȱ¢ǰȱȱ ȱ

(regardless of length of marriage), children, and parents of a U.S. citizen who served in a combat

zone designated in connection with Operation Iraqi Freedom and died as a result of injury or

disease caused by such service. These provisions would have established specific guidelines for

the immigration benefits; however, it appears that these were similar to the provisions of §1703 of

P.L. 108-136, Div. A, codified as notes to 8 U.S.C. §1151, regarding family-based immigrant

petitions and adjustment-of-status applications, and as amendments to INA §319 (8 U.S.C.

§1430), which provides that the surviving spouse, child, or parent of a U.S. citizen (including a

person granted military-service-based posthumous citizenship) who dies during a period of

honorable service in an active duty status in the U.S. Armed Forces may be naturalized upon

compliance with all the INA requirements except for the residence and physical presence

requirements. However, the provisions of P.L. 108-136 were not limited to survivors of service

members who died as a result of combat in Operation Iraqi Freedom, but were extended to

survivors of service members who died as a result of service during periods of hostilities.

Section 509 of S. 2611/S. 2612 would have provided that numerical limits on immigrant visas

shall not apply to the adult sons and daughters of U.S. citizens naturalized under a statute

benefitting Filipino World War II veterans. H.R. 901 would have given priority to the issuance of

immigrant visas to the children and adult sons and daughters of these naturalized Filipino World

War II veterans. H.R. 4498 would have authorized the case-by-case waiver of certain

naturalization requirements for a child adopted outside the United States by military personnel

who at the time of adoption was stationed outside the United States.

ȱȱȱŗŗŖ ȱ

Sections 673 and 674 of P.L. 110-181, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year

2008 (January 28, 2008), respectively, (1) ensure reentry into the United States by LPRs who are

spouses and children accompanying a military service member abroad who might otherwise be

deemed to have abandoned their LPR status and (2) provide for the treatment of periods abroad

accompanying the service member as periods in the United States for residence and physical

presence purposes and also provide for overseas naturalization for such spouses and children.60

P.L. 110-251, the Kendell Frederick Citizenship Assistance Act (June 26, 2008)61 permits the use

in military-service naturalization applications of fingerprints taken by the DOD at the time of

enlistment, rather than requiring service members to obtain and submit separate fingerprints in

accordance with the naturalization requirements of the DHS, provided that the naturalization

application was filed within 24 months after enlistment or the fingerprints had been submitted

with an application for adjustment to LPR status within 24 months of enlistment. The Secretaries

of Homeland Security and Defense are required to cooperate to make fingerprints and other

biometric data more accessible for naturalization purposes, by determining a data format, making

fingerprints available without charge for naturalization purposes, and otherwise facilitating

military naturalizations. Rapid electronic transmission of biometric data is to be implemented

within one year of enactment.62 The Secretary of Homeland Security is to centralize data

The USCIS reported that it conducted the first overseas naturalization of a military spouse in May 2008 and has since

naturalized 46 military spouses overseas, at

http://www.uscis.gov/files/article/USCIS%20FACT%20SHEET%20%20Naturalization_Process_Military_3feb09.pdf.

Enacted S. 2516; related bill is H.R. 2884 for which the CBO report, dated November 5, 2007, is at

http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/87xx/doc8785/hr2884.pdf.

This system apparently is not fully operational. According to the USCIS response to the USCIS Ombudsman Annual

(continued...)

ȱȱȱ

ŗşȱ

¡ȱ£ȱȱ¢ȱǱȱȱ ǰȱ¢ǰȱȱ ȱ

processing for military naturalization applications filed by service members serving abroad on

active duty. The Secretary of Homeland Security, the Directory of the FBI, and the Directory of

National Intelligence are to ensure that military naturalization applications and associated

background checks are processed and adjudicated within 180 days of receiving responses to all

background checks. The act also requires timely updates to agency websites and application

forms after changes to regulations on military naturalization.

Various reports are required under the act. The Secretary of Homeland Security is required to

submit a report to the appropriate congressional committees within 120 days of enactment on the

entire adjudication process for a military-service-based naturalization application, including a

description of (1) the methods used by the DHS and the DOD to prepare, handle, and adjudicate

such applications; (2) the effectiveness of the chain of authority, supervision, and training of

employees (whether of the federal government or other entities) who have any role in the process;

and (3) the ability of the DHS and the DOD to use technology to execute any aspect of the

process and to safeguard privacy and civil liberties.63 The Comptroller General (GAO) and the

Inspector General (IG) of the DHS are required to conduct a study, including an assessment of

any technology that may be used to improve the efficiency of the military naturalization process

and an assessment of the impact of the act on privacy and civil liberties. GAO and the IG are

required to submit a report to the appropriate congressional committees on this study, including

recommendations for improving implementation of this act, within 180 days of the date on which

the report on the adjudication process is submitted by the Secretary of Homeland Security.

“Appropriate congressional committees” is defined as including the Senate Committees on

Armed Services, Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, and the Judiciary, and the House

of Representatives Committees on Armed Services, Homeland Security, and the Judiciary.

The comprehensive immigration reform bills, S. 1348 (§§711-715 as placed on the Senate

calendar), S. 1639 (§701, as placed on the Senate calendar), and H.R. 1645 (§§711-715, as

introduced), also contained versions of this legislation. S. 1348 and H.R. 1645 would also have

provided for a dedicated toll-free telephone information service to assist military service members

with military-service-based naturalization.

The issue of requiring fingerprints from military service members had already been partly

addressed by USCIS. The fingerprint requirement is not in the statutes or regulations governing

naturalization; rather, it is the practice to submit these to be used in conducting the criminal

background check on naturalization applicants. In testimony before the Senate Committee on

Armed Forces, Director Emilio Gonzalez of the USCIS noted that USCIS, in collaboration with

the DOD and the FBI, had instituted a change in the fingerprinting process permitting U.S.

military personnel to sign a release authorizing the use of fingerprints provided at enlistment for

(...continued)

Report 2008, the latest report, the USCIS is analyzing and evaluating its identity management and background check

services, including its Biometrics Storage System (BSS) and is developing new functional requirements and

development timelines for these systems. 2008 Comprehensive Response to the DHS CIS Ombudsman Report at 3-4

(Sept. 30, 2008), available at http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/cisomb-uscis-response-annual-report-fy2008.pdf. The

Ombudsman Report noted that case-file digitization and BSS were not fully operational, although they would resolve

the difficulties in physical transfer and tracking of files. It also noted some improvements in processing of military

naturalizations, but not the use of such systems pursuant to the new statute. USCIS Ombudsman Annual Report 2008,

supra note 3, at 24-26, 58 (June 30, 2008).

This report was submitted to the appropriate congressional committees on Feb. 10, 2009. The other reports required

by this act have not been submitted yet, but the deadlines have not passed.

ȱȱȱ

ŘŖȱ

¡ȱ£ȱȱ¢ȱǱȱȱ ǰȱ¢ǰȱȱ ȱ

immigration purposes.64 However, congressional hearing testimony in 2008 alleged that FBI

processing of fingerprints still accounts for significant delays despite the permitted use of DOD

fingerprints in lieu of fingerprints taken and submitted in accordance with USCIS procedures for

civilians.65

P.L. 110-382, the Military Personnel Citizenship Processing Act,66 expedites certain military

service-related applications by establishing a FBI liaison office in USCIS to monitor the

completion of FBI background checks and setting a deadline for processing such naturalization

applications. The FBI monitoring and the processing deadline apply to naturalization applications

filed by or on behalf of: current and former service members based on military service, the

spouses of current service members posted abroad, surviving spouses and children of service

members who died on active-duty service, and deceased service members eligible for posthumous

citizenship. If USCIS cannot meet the deadline, it is required to give the applicant an explanation

for the delay and an estimate for the completion date. The Director of USCIS is required to

submit to the relevant congressional oversight subcommittees annual reports identifying every

application covered by these statutory requirements that is not processed and adjudicated within

one year after filing due to delays in required background checks. Within 180 days of enactment,

the Comptroller General must submit to Congress a report regarding the average length of time

taken by USCIS to process and adjudicate applications for naturalization filed by or on behalf of

members of the U.S. Armed Forces, deceased members of the Armed Forces, and their spouses

and children. The act and amendments made by the act to current law sunset five years after the

date of enactment (October 9, 2013).

Although not directly involving military service, with regard to the naturalization of LPRs

originally admitted into the United States as special immigrant Iraqi or Afghani translators or

interpreters, P.L. 110-3667 provides that time spent abroad as a translator or interpreter for the

U.S. Department of State or Armed Forces shall not be considered to break any period for which

continuous residence in the United States is required for naturalization.

Aside from these public laws, there were several notable bills introduced in the 110th Congress.

The Immigration Needs of America’s Fighting Men and Women was the subject of a May 2008

hearing by the House Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security, and

International Law, and was the focus of H.R. 6020, a bill to further facilitate and expand

immigration benefits for military service members and their families. H.R. 6020, the Lance

Corporal Jose Gutierrez Act of 2008, was reported by the House Judiciary Committee and placed

on the calendar in October 2008.

Testimony at a hearing on “Contributions of Immigrants to the U.S. Military” on July 10, 2006, available at

http://armed-services.senate.gov/statemnt/2006/July/Gonzalez%2007-10-06.pdf. This policy change apparently was in

response to recommendations made by the USCIS Ombudsman in March 2006, as described in USCIS Ombudsman,

Annual Report 2006 at p. 73 (submitted to the Congressional Committees on the Judiciary on June 19, 2006).

Response of Margaret D. Stock, Attorney and Lieutenant Colonel, Military Police Corps, U.S. Army Reserve, to

questions at the hearing of the House Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security, and

International Law on Immigration Needs of America’s Fighting Men and Women, May 20, 2008 (transcript of hearing

unavailable as of date of this report).

Enacted S. 2840; related bill is H.R. 7057. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) report for S. 2840, dated May

15, 2008, is available at http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/92xx/doc9275/s2840.pdf.

121 Stat. 227 (2007), amending the National Defense Authorization Act for FY2006, P.L. 109-163, Div A, §1059,

119 Stat. 3443 (2006).

ȱȱȱ

Řŗȱ

¡ȱ£ȱȱ¢ȱǱȱȱ ǰȱ¢ǰȱȱ ȱ

H.R. 6020 would have expanded the scope of military naturalizations by, inter alia, (1) providing

that persons who serve honorably in the Armed Forces in support of contingency operations

(defined at 10 U.S.C. §101(a)(13)) that are not covered by an executive order designating a period

of hostilities would be eligible for naturalization based on INA §329; (2) increasing the period

within which a person may file an application under INA §328 (8 U.S.C. §1439) after leaving

military service from six months to one year; and (3) eliminating the need to allege satisfaction of

certain naturalization requirements during periods when service was not continuous. The bill

would have permitted service members who have conditional LPR status to wait until they are

discharged from service to apply for removal of the condition and eliminated the requirement that

a service member petitioning for removal of the conditional status for an alien spouse, son, or

daughter must appear for a personal interview.

The bill would have provided for special consideration in removal proceedings. Removal

proceedings could not be initiated against an alien who has served or is serving honorably in the

Armed Forces without the approval of the Director of the USCIS or the Assistant Secretary of

Homeland Security for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement after consideration of certain

factors. Aliens who have served or are serving honorably in the Armed Forces would not be

subject to expedited removal proceedings or reinstatement of removal orders. Certain

inadmissibility or deportation grounds would not apply to aliens who have served or are serving

honorably in the Armed Forces or who are the spouse, minor child, adult son/daughter, parent, or

minor sibling of a member of the Armed Forces. Other grounds of inadmissibility or deportation

(except for certain criminal and national security grounds, alien smuggling, unlawful voting, and

parental kidnapping) could be waived at the discretion of the Secretary of Homeland Security or

the Attorney General. Certain factors could be considered in the waiver determination.

The bill would have included certain legal admission benefits. Spouses and children of an LPR

serving in the Armed Forces would not be subject to the numerical limits on visas for the spouses

and children of LPRs, so immigrant visas would be immediately available for them. For

undocumented aliens, the status of an alien spouse, minor child, adult son/daughter, parent, or

minor sibling of an eligible member of the Armed Forces would be adjusted to that of an LPR if

such alien (1) applies for adjustment and is in the United States on the date of filing such

application; (2) is admissible as an immigrant; and (3) pays a fee, determined by the Secretary of

Homeland Security. Certain grounds of inadmissibility would not apply to such adjustment of

status, and certain other grounds could be waived at the discretion of the Secretary of Homeland

Security. This benefit would be available for two years after the death of an eligible member of

the Armed Forces whose death resulted from injury/disease incurred in or aggravated by his/her

service in the Armed Forces. An eligible member of the Armed Forces would include a U.S.

citizen who is serving or has served honorably as a member of the Selected Reserve of the Ready

Reserve or on active duty in the Armed Forces during the Vietnam War or any period of hostilities

subsequently designated by executive order.

S. 1348, one of the comprehensive immigration reform bills, included the DREAM Act (§§621632) with its provision that two years of military service (honorable discharge if discharged) may

satisfy one of the requirements for achieving unconditional LPR status. This would be available

to an undocumented alien who has initially been granted conditional LPR status as a person who

has been continuously physically present in the United States after initially entering while under

the age of 16 years, among other qualifications.

Section 751 of S. 1348 would have amended INA §329 to provide that persons who are not U.S.

citizens shall not be denied the opportunity to serve in the U.S. Armed Forces and that, with the

ȱȱȱ

ŘŘȱ

¡ȱ£ȱȱ¢ȱǱȱȱ ǰȱ¢ǰȱȱ ȱ

approval of the chain of command, an alien who has performed two years of honorable,

satisfactory, active-duty service shall be granted U.S. citizenship without regard to other

naturalization requirements, processes, or procedures upon the satisfaction of three conditions.

The three proposed conditions were (1) the alien must have filed a naturalization application, (2)

the alien must demonstrate English and civics knowledge and good moral character to the

military chain of command, consistent with the requirements of the INA, and (3) the alien must

take the naturalization oath of allegiance. The alien would be required to be naturalized not later

than 90 days after satisfying the requirements of this provision.

H.R. 1745 would have provided immigration benefits to the immediate relatives of an active duty

or reserve member of the Armed Forces. It would have waived inadmissibility of such immediate

relatives based on misrepresentation of material fact in order to procure an immigration benefit or

on a false claim of citizenship for any purpose or benefit under any federal or state law. The bill

would also have extended the V nonimmigrant visa to military families. V visas enable the

spouses and children of LPRs, who filed family-based immigrant petitions before December 21,

2000, and are awaiting the availability of an immigrant visa, to enter and wait in the United States

for the immigrant visa if the petition (or the visa availability, if the petition was approved) has

been pending for three years or longer. The bill would have permitted the spouses and children of

active duty or reserve military personnel to receive a V visa regardless of when the petition was

filed or how long the petition or visa had been pending.

ȱ ȱ

As of the date of this report, there appeared to be no legislation in the 111th Congress concerning

immigration benefits related to military service. Although some bills providing such benefits were

enacted during the 110th Congress, several issues and proposals remain unresolved and may be

addressed during the 111th Congress.

ȱȱȱȱȱ£ȱȱ

Although P.L. 108-136 and close cooperation between the DOD and USCIS of the DHS appear to

have facilitated the naturalization of military service personnel, particularly of those serving

abroad, supporters of military service members advocate further streamlining of the process,

beyond the provisions enacted in the 110th Congress. Some proposals would make naturalization

automatic for persons who are deployed to a combat zone, waiving any requirement for

demonstrating good moral character or knowledge of civics or English. Critics of such proposals,

although acknowledging the sacrifice and contribution of military personnel in a combat zone,

urge caution when considering eliminating substantive requirements such as good moral

character. Supporters of such proposals argue that persons serving in the military can be assumed

to have a working knowledge of English and that an allegiance to the principles of U.S.

government and good moral character can be fairly attributed to persons serving honorably in a

combat zone, justifying the waiver of any technical test of civics and English or necessity of

demonstrating good moral character independently. Furthermore, supporters argue, once a person

is deployed to a combat zone, the timely processing of a naturalization application becomes more

urgent.

Other proposals would not waive requirements for good moral character, civics, and English, but

would authorize the chain of command in the DOD to determine whether a military service

member satisfies these requirements. Proponents assert that the commanding officers of a military

ȱȱȱ

Řřȱ

¡ȱ£ȱȱ¢ȱǱȱȱ ǰȱ¢ǰȱȱ ȱ

service member would be better able than a USCIS adjudicator to judge whether that service

member satisfies the requirements. Opponents note that it would burden military officers with

having to learn immigration law and act as immigration adjudicator, and that commanding

officers may inadvertently take into account factors that are not relevant to a naturalization

adjudication or may even interject personal knowledge and biases in the process.

More limited proposals would permit certain requirements for naturalization processing to be

satisfied by equivalent requirements or functions satisfied by the DOD, such as medical physical

examinations.

ȱ ȱȱȱ ȱ

There is currently no special relief from removal nor special consideration for permitting aliens

waiting for an immigrant visa to enter or remain in the United States based on whether the alien is

an immediate relative of a military service member. Advocates of special immigration benefits for

family members of military personnel frame such benefits as consideration extended to the

military personnel, to relieve them of anxiety and uncertainty concerning the status of family

members while they are on active duty, particularly if they are deployed abroad in a hostile area.

Supporters of current law argue that family members should not receive special treatment because

they happen to be related to a U.S. military service member. They warn that expansion of removal

relief and other immigration benefits to family members would have implications beyond the

desire to assist U.S. military personnel.

In addition to the absence of such substantive relief for family members of military service

members, there apparently are certain procedural complications or delays. Reportedly, medical

examinations required for application for an immigrant visa, for admission to the United States as

an immigrant, or for adjustment of status to lawful permanent residence, cannot be performed by

most military physicians because they are not recognized by DHS as being qualified to perform

such examinations, thus imposing on military families the time and expense of obtaining

examinations from DHS-designated physicians.68 Under INA §232 (8 U.S.C. §1222), 8 C.F.R. §

232.2, and 42 C.F.R. part 34, medical officers of the U.S. Public Health Service and DHSdesignated civil surgeons with at least four years of professional experience are authorized to

conduct medical examinations of aliens for immigration purposes. Civil surgeons with fewer than

four years of experience may be designated at the discretion of DHS. U.S. military physicians

with at least four years of professional experience are considered to be civil surgeons for the

purpose of physical examinations required by INA §232(b) for special immigrants described in

INA §101(a)(27)(K) (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(27)(K) defining certain aliens who enlisted in the U.S.

Armed Forces abroad as special immigrants).69 Aside from this limited purpose, it appears that

military physicians are not considered to be “civil surgeons” for the purpose of conducting

immigration-related medical examinations; therefore, legislation would be necessary to mandate

that military physicians be considered “civil surgeons” for medical examinations required for the

family of service members.

Margaret D. Stock, Attorney and Lieutenant Colonel, Military Police Corps, U.S. Army Reserve, Written Statement

submitted at the hearing of the House Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security, and

International Law on Immigration Needs of America’s Fighting Men and Women, p. 6, May 20, 2008 [hereinafter

Stock Written Testimony].

P.L. 102-484, div. A, §1079, 106 Stat. 2514 (1992), codified as amended at notes under 8 U.S.C. §1222.

ȱȱȱ

ŘŚȱ

¡ȱ£ȱȱ¢ȱǱȱȱ ǰȱ¢ǰȱȱ ȱ

ȱȱȱȱȱǯǯȱȱ

Current policy guidelines of U.S. Customs and Immigration Enforcement (ICE) direct that

military service be taken into consideration in determining whether prosecutorial discretion

should be exercised in favor of any alien subject to removal, particularly an alien eligible for

naturalization based on military service.70 The policy disfavors but does not absolutely preclude

initiating and pursuing removal actions against members of the U.S. Armed Forces, and

reportedly some ICE officers are doing so.71 In any case, the policy is not grounded in a statutory

requirement; therefore, ICE officials could choose to rescind or modify the policy at their

discretion. Legislation would be necessary to make such a policy a permanent part of the

immigration statutes and/or to strengthen favorable exercise of discretion or prohibit prosecution

of removal proceedings against current or former service members. Proponents of such legislation

argue that removal actions unnecessarily subject service members who are likely to be granted

military-service-based naturalization to the time, expense, and stress of having to defend against

such actions; burden the federal government and U.S. taxpayers with the expense of prosecuting

such actions which are likely moot; and undermine the needs and effectiveness of the U.S. Armed

Forces when active service members must take time away from their duties to defend against

such actions and potentially could be removed.

See Marcy M. Forman, Acting Director of Office of Investigations, ICE, DHS, Memorandum re Issuances of Notices

to Appear, Administrative Orders of Removal, or Reinstatement of a Final Removal Order on Aliens with United States

Military Service (June 21, 2004), available at http://www.bibdaily.com/pdfs/Forman%206-21-04.pdf (“Accordingly,

ICE should not initiate removal proceedings against aliens who are eligible for naturalization under sections 328 or 329

of the INA, notwithstanding an order of removal.”). See also Doris Meissner, Commissioner of INS, Memorandum re

Exercising Prosecutorial Discretion 8, 11 (November 17, 2000) (discussing exercise of prosecutorial discretion in favor

of not pursuing removal actions against current or former members of the U.S. Armed Forces and former requirement

that INS regional directors approve such actions), and INS, Interim Enforcement Procedures—Standard Operating

Procedures for Enforcement Officers: Arrest, Detention, Processing and Removal, § V.D.8 (June 5, 1997).

Stock Written Testimony, supra note 68, at 4-5.

ȱȱȱ

Řśȱ

¡ȱ£ȱȱ¢ȱǱȱȱ ǰȱ¢ǰȱȱ ȱ

¡ȱǯ ȱ¢ȱȱȱȱ

£ȱȱǰȱ¢ȱǰȱȱȱ

¢ȱŘŖŖŜȱ

State

Total

Alabama

Alaska

Arizona

Arkansas

California

Colorado

Connecticut

Delaware

District of Columbia

Federated States of Micronesia

Florida

Georgia

Guam

Hawaii

Idaho

Illinois

Indiana

Iowa

Kansas

Kentucky

Louisiana

Maine

Marshall Islands

Maryland

Massachusetts

Michigan

Minnesota

Mississippi

Missouri

Montana

Nebraska

Nevada

288

5,806

137

284

2,430

264

361

579

519

472

121

128

209

ȱȱȱ

Percentage of all aliens

0.04%

0.12%

0.69%

0.04%

13.90%

0.33%

0.68%

0.06%

0.11%

0.01%

5.82%

0.63%

0.02%

0.86%

0.12%

1.39%

0.16%

0.15%

0.06%

0.07%

0.03%

0.00%

1.24%

1.13%

0.29%

0.31%

0.02%

0.14%

0.02%

0.12%

0.50%

ŘŜȱ

¡ȱ£ȱȱ¢ȱǱȱȱ ǰȱ¢ǰȱȱ ȱ

State

Total

Percentage of all aliens

New Hampshire

New Jersey

New Mexico

New York

North Carolina

North Dakota

Northern Mariana Islands

Ohio

Oklahoma

Oregon

Palau

Pennsylvania

Puerto Rico

Rhode Island

South Carolina

South Dakota

Tennessee

Texas

Utah

Vermont

Virgin Islands

Virginia

Washington

West Virginia

Wisconsin

Wyoming

Unknown

1,250

3,338

104

127

227

104

1,825

499

379

21,039

0.07%

2.99%

0.23%

7.99%

0.25%

0.01%

0.18%

0.16%

0.30%

0.00%

0.54%

0.11%

0.25%

0.07%

0.02%

0.12%

4.37%

0.17%

0.02%

0.18%

1.19%

0.91%

0.01%

0.21%

0.02%

50.38%

Total

41,760

100.00%

Source: DOD data as of January 2006.

ȱȱȱ

Řŝȱ

¡ȱ£ȱȱ¢ȱǱȱȱ ǰȱ¢ǰȱȱ ȱ

¡ȱǯ ȱ¢ȱ£ȱǰȱ¢ȱ

¢ȱȱǱȱȱśŖȱȱ

Country of Birth

Philippines

Mexico

Jamaica

Dominican Republic

Haiti

Columbia

El Salvador

Trinidad and Tobago

Peru

Guyana

Ecuador

China

Nicaragua

Nigeria

Guatemala

Vietnam

Korea, Republic Of

Honduras

Cuba

Thailand

Ghana

Canada

United Kingdom

Germany

Panama

Venezuela

Kenya

Liberia

Russia

India

Belize

Poland

Barbados

ȱȱȱ

Non-US

Citizen/National

14,706

4,983

2,909

1,484

913

1,273

887

1,009

782

766

665

621

579

514

501

1,492

3,806

512

523

901

384

1,337

2,663

9,716

1,655

277

154

243

258

445

214

372

253

4,290

2,433

960

513

428

403

370

356

304

262

249

244

239

235

228

220

215

200

197

190

173

160

150

128

121

101

Unknown

Total

712

1,211

418

214

258

197

184

137

151

129

136

286

103

105

19,708

8,627

4,287

2,211

1,599

1,873

1,441

1,502

1,237

1,117

999

994

954

756

806

1,803

4,307

790

823

1,180

653

1,602

2,907

9,865

1,830

440

315

375

345

566

311

502

344

ŘŞȱ

¡ȱ£ȱȱ¢ȱǱȱȱ ǰȱ¢ǰȱȱ ȱ

Country of Birth

Brazil

Laos

Dominica

Ethiopia

South Africa

St. Lucia

Grenada

Togo

Ukraine

Romania

Japan

Sierra Leone

Cambodia

St. Vincent, Grenadines

Argentina

Fiji

Bolivia

Source:

Non-US

Citizen/National

298

299

192

147

113

121

148

156

197

2,824

124

168

115

105

133

Unknown

Total

438

392

281

249

202

196

219

132

245

274

2,879

186

225

167

164

136

191

CRS analysis of DOD data as of November 2007.

ȱȱȱ

Řşȱ

¡ȱ£ȱȱ¢ȱǱȱȱ ǰȱ¢ǰȱȱ ȱ

¡ȱǯ ȱ£ȱǰȱ¢ȱ

¢ȱȱǱȱȱśŖȱȱ

Country of Birth

Philippines

Mexico

Jamaica

Dominican Republic

Columbia

El Salvador

Haiti

Peru

China

Vietnam

Trinidad And Tobago

Nigeria

Guyana

Ecuador

Korea, Republic Of

Canada

Nicaragua

Thailand

United Kingdom

Cuba

Guatemala

Honduras

India

Brazil

Venezuela

Ghana

Kenya

Poland

Germany

Liberia

Panama

Cambodia

Cameroon

Non

Citizen/National

US Citizen/ National

3,030

1,183

523

266

336

178

170

182

201

486

235

103

162

160

623

570

191

1,024

252

100

203

116

1,966

346

ȱȱȱ

565

447

179

106

Unknown

Total

3,598

1,632

702

372

432

270

256

270

283

567

312

169

226

215

676

617

120

234

1,067

294

139

239

118

110

137

1,984

363

řŖȱ

¡ȱ£ȱȱ¢ȱǱȱȱ ǰȱ¢ǰȱȱ ȱ

Country of Birth

Non

Citizen/National

US Citizen/ National

Ethiopia

Laos

Dominica

Portugal

Belize

Morocco

Russia

Togo

Taiwan

Costa Rica

Japan

Pakistan

Barbados

Hong Kong

Korea (North)

Fiji

South Africa

Source:

103

124

1,031

Unknown

Total

116

135

1,041

CRS analysis of DOD data as of November 2007.

ȱȱ ȱ

(name redacted)

Legislative Attorney

[redacted]@crs.loc.gov, 7-....

(name redacted)

Specialist in Immigration Policy

[redacted]@crs.loc.gov, 7-....

Mari-Jana Oboroceanu, Information Research Specialist, Knowledge Services Group, Congressional

Research Service, obtained the DOD statistics. LaTanya Andrews and Jamie L. Hutchinson, Graphics

Specialists, Office of Legislative Information, Congressional Research Service, produced the graphics in

this report. (name redacted), Information Research Specialist, Knowledge Services Group, Congressional

Research Service, obtained the DHS report to appropriate congressional committees that is required under

P.L. 110-251, the Kendell Frederick Citizenship Assistance Act.

ȱȱȱ

řŗȱ

EveryCRSReport.com

The Congressional Research Service (CRS) is a federal legislative branch agency, housed inside the

Library of Congress, charged with providing the United States Congress non-partisan advice on

issues that may come before Congress.

EveryCRSReport.com republishes CRS reports that are available to all Congressional staff. The

reports are not classified, and Members of Congress routinely make individual reports available to

the public.

Prior to our republication, we redacted names, phone numbers and email addresses of analysts

who produced the reports. We also added this page to the report. We have not intentionally made

any other changes to any report published on EveryCRSReport.com.

CRS reports, as a work of the United States government, are not subject to copyright protection in

the United States. Any CRS report may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety without

permission from CRS. However, as a CRS report may include copyrighted images or material from a

third party, you may need to obtain permission of the copyright holder if you wish to copy or

otherwise use copyrighted material.

Information in a CRS report should not be relied upon for purposes other than public

understanding of information that has been provided by CRS to members of Congress in

connection with CRS' institutional role.

EveryCRSReport.com is not a government website and is not affiliated with CRS. We do not claim

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.