NVC, DQ'd and interview timeliness

[mam521 2,468]

34 minutes ago, TiffAndMike said:

So you are one of the people on here who went to the interview right before your two year wedding anniversary?

Yes.  Interview March 9, 2020, 2 year anniversary was March 31, 2020 and we entered the US on April 1, 2020.  

 

23 minutes ago, S2N said:

Some endorse as CR-1 and USCIS screws up and the person has to file an I-90.

I had both.  My GC and Kid1's GC came statused as IR1/2.  Kid2's GC came statused as CR-2.  I had to file the I-90.  The funnier part was that even though Kid2 was issued a new, IR-2, 10 year GC, we still got a NOA reminding us not to forget to file the ROC 🙄.

 

Water under the bridge.  We have CoC for both Kid1 and Kid2 with no issues.  

 

Important to note once in the US, the DoS's role changes and they will issue that passport for a derivative citizenship child, but USCIS has to issue the CoC for the child to have undeniable proof of citizenship.  In the event the derivative beneficiary loses their passport or allows it to expire, that CoC is needed.  DoS doesn't override that need.  

Edited Monday at 03:29 PM by mam521

[S2N 214]

11 minutes ago, mam521 said:

Important to note once in the US, the DoS's role changes and they will issue that passport for a derivative citizenship child, but USCIS has to issue the CoC for the child to have undeniable proof of citizenship.  In the event the derivative beneficiary loses their passport or allows it to expire, that CoC is needed.  DoS doesn't override that need.  

 

Incorrect. This was actually the case I was thinking of. The Secretary of State has authority to make definitive judgments on citizenship status. One of the ways he he exercises that authority by issuing passports (all passports are issued under his authority.)

 

Based on BIA precedent, the issuance of a passport is conclusive proof of citizenship. USCIS does not have independent authority to make a contrary determination if the Secretary of State has ever issued a passport, even per there own internal ruling, and they must follow the State Department on this.
 

Individuals might want a citizenship certificate in case they lose a passport, but it’s costly, takes time, and ultimately it’d be cheaper and quicker to get a replacement passport after losing one since the State Department will conduct a free search of passport records issued after 1994 and considers that sufficient proof of citizenship to reissue. Before 1994 it costs $150, which is still cheaper than a citizenship certificate.

Edited Monday at 03:41 PM by S2N

[mam521 2,468]

5 minutes ago, S2N said:

 

Incorrect. This was actually the case I was thinking of. The Secretary of State has authority to make definitive judgments on citizenship status. One of the ways he he exercises that authority by issuing passports (all passports are issued under his authority.)

 

Based on BIA precedent, the issuance of a passport is conclusive proof of citizenship. USCIS does not have independent authority to make a contrary determination if the Secretary of State has ever issued a passport, even per there own internal ruling, and they must follow the State Department on this.
 

Individuals might want a citizenship certificate in case they lose a passport, but it’s costly, takes time, and ultimately it’d be cheaper and quicker to get a replacement passport after losing one since the State Department will conduct a free search of passport records issued after 1994 and considers that sufficient proof of citizenship to reissue. Before 1994 it costs $150, which is still cheaper than a citizenship certificate.

If you search, you will find a number of people who have no proof of citizenship and have lost their passport.  They end up screwed.  I haven't seen the alternate where the passport has been reissued - just the opposite.  No proof of citizenship and no passport.  

[S2N 214]

6 minutes ago, mam521 said:

If you search, you will find a number of people who have no proof of citizenship and have lost their passport.  They end up screwed.  I haven't seen the alternate where the passport has been reissued - just the opposite.  No proof of citizenship and no passport.  

I just linked to the USCIS administrative ruling stating the opposite, which also references the legally controlling BIA ruling. Anecdotal evidence is great; and many people file N-600 because they don’t understand the law and want to be safe, but as a matter of law a passport or record of a passport having been issued is legally equivalent to a citizenship certificate, and this is recognized by DOJ, DHS, and DoS.

 

Edit: Here is where State discusses how to get a passport if you’ve lost one and have no other proof: file search at the bottom

Edited Monday at 03:54 PM by S2N

[OldUser 9,472]

18 minutes ago, S2N said:

I just linked to the USCIS administrative ruling stating the opposite, which also references the legally controlling BIA ruling. Anecdotal evidence is great; and many people file N-600 because they don’t understand the law and want to be safe, but as a matter of law a passport or record of a passport having been issued is legally equivalent to a citizenship certificate, and this is recognized by DOJ, DHS, and DoS.

 

Edit: Here is where State discusses how to get a passport if you’ve lost one and have no other proof: file search at the bottom

Here's example of DOS pushing back and requesting more proof the child is a citizen:

 

This can happen at any stage in life when child renews US passport, tries go get SSA benefits or employment at government agency. CoC is undeniable proof of citizenship. Otherwise child will be scrambling for evidence such school records and parent's physical presence decades later...

 

 

[S2N 214]

22 minutes ago, OldUser said:

Here's example of DOS pushing back and requesting more proof the child is a citizen:

 

This can happen at any stage in life when child renews US passport, tries go get SSA benefits or employment at government agency. CoC is undeniable proof of citizenship. Otherwise child will be scrambling for evidence such school records and parent's physical presence decades later...

 

 

Thats an example of an initial passport issuance after parent naturalization. Once a passport is issued that is evidence of citizenship and the record of its issuance in a file search would be sufficient. You’d need the same evidence for a CoC after parent naturalization as the standard is the same unless you previously got a passport, in which case the passport would be proof. If you got a CoC first the CoC would be proof for the passport. They’re legally equivalent.

 

Is there any evidence of State not accepting its own free file search records as proof of citizenship after initial issuance? That’s the question here.

Edited Monday at 04:36 PM by S2N

[OldUser 9,472]

32 minutes ago, S2N said:

Thats an example of an initial passport issuance after parent naturalization. Once a passport is issued that is evidence of citizenship and the record of its issuance in a file search would be sufficient. You’d need the same evidence for a CoC after parent naturalization as the standard is the same unless you previously got a passport, in which case the passport would be proof. If you got a CoC first the CoC would be proof for the passport. They’re legally equivalent.

 

Is there any evidence of State not accepting its own free file search records as proof of citizenship after initial issuance? That’s the question here.

Here's entire legal brief why N-600 is important.

 

Good quotes from it:

 

"Even though acquired and derivative citizens are able to apply
for and obtain passports as proof of status, passports provide inade-
quate protection compared to the Certificate of Citizenship.26 To
begin, the Certificate never expires, unlike passports.27 More impor-
tantly, USCIS has admitted that passports only “generally” serve as
evidence of U.S. citizenship.28 According to the agency, a Certificate
of Citizenship “may be required” to apply for certain benefits,
including Social Security, driver’s licenses, financial aid, employment,
and passport renewals.29"

 

Source:

 

https://www.nyulawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/NYULawReview-Volume-95-Issue-4-Bedoya.pdf

 

If I have more time today, I'll attach multiple sources where people reported being stuck in limbo due to not having certificate.

 

[S2N 214]

9 minutes ago, OldUser said:

Here's entire legal brief why N-600 is important.

 

Good quotes from it:

 

"Even though acquired and derivative citizens are able to apply
for and obtain passports as proof of status, passports provide inade-
quate protection compared to the Certificate of Citizenship.26 To
begin, the Certificate never expires, unlike passports.27 More impor-
tantly, USCIS has admitted that passports only “generally” serve as
evidence of U.S. citizenship.28 According to the agency, a Certificate
of Citizenship “may be required” to apply for certain benefits,
including Social Security, driver’s licenses, financial aid, employment,
and passport renewals.29"

 

Source:

 

https://www.nyulawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/NYULawReview-Volume-95-Issue-4-Bedoya.pdf

 

If I have more time today, I'll attach multiple sources where people reported being stuck in limbo due to not having certificate.

 

Probably worth splitting this to another thread, but just scanning the article it seems to assuming that DHS SAVE is an accurate database. From personal experience with my mother, it’s not, and her US passport was the only record of her naturalization after losing her naturalization certificate as USCIS had no data stored on it within the databases and had to do a manual record search. I’m personally biased in favor of trusting State more to get it right than USCIS, since I’ve had nothing but positive interactions with them. Meanwhile USCIS lost my mother’s naturalization records. I’d personally feel much safer if my kids only had a passport than only had a CoC because I have more faith in DoS to keep their records up to date.

Edited Monday at 05:15 PM by S2N

[OldUser 9,472]

9 minutes ago, S2N said:

Probably worth splitting this to another thread, but just scanning the article it seems to assuming that DHS SAVE is an accurate database. From personal experience with my mother, it’s not, and her US passport was the only record of her naturalization after losing her naturalization certificate as USCIS had no data stored on it within the databases and had to do a manual record search. I’m personally biased in favor of trusting State more to get it right than USCIS, since I’ve had nothing but positive interactions with them. Meanwhile USCIS lost my mother’s naturalization records. I’d personally feel much safer if my kids only had a passport than only had a CoC because I have more faith in DoS to keep their records up to date.

Well, but it depends who you deal with and why. When going to SSA, getting many other benefits inside the US, DHS is the authority confirming somebody's status, not DOS.

 

DOS is mainly concerned about passports and travel in and out of the US, as far as I know.

Edited Monday at 05:23 PM by OldUser

[Dashinka 25,706]

1 hour ago, S2N said:

 

Incorrect. This was actually the case I was thinking of. The Secretary of State has authority to make definitive judgments on citizenship status. One of the ways he he exercises that authority by issuing passports (all passports are issued under his authority.)

 

Based on BIA precedent, the issuance of a passport is conclusive proof of citizenship. USCIS does not have independent authority to make a contrary determination if the Secretary of State has ever issued a passport, even per there own internal ruling, and they must follow the State Department on this.
 

Individuals might want a citizenship certificate in case they lose a passport, but it’s costly, takes time, and ultimately it’d be cheaper and quicker to get a replacement passport after losing one since the State Department will conduct a free search of passport records issued after 1994 and considers that sufficient proof of citizenship to reissue. Before 1994 it costs $150, which is still cheaper than a citizenship certificate.

There are certain, albeit rare, reasons to file the N600 and get a CoC for a minor child that is a USC but through naturalization, or via an IR2/CR2 process.

 

 

[S2N 214]

17 minutes ago, OldUser said:

Well, but it depends who you deal with and why. When going to SSA, getting many other benefits inside the US, DHS is the authority confirming somebody's status, not DOS.

 

DOS is mainly concerned about passports and travel in and out of the US, as far as I know.

Just to use SSA as an example, they list a passport on the list of things they accept for proof of change in citizenship status higher than a CoC: link

Passport is also accepted as definitive proof for form I-9, Real ID, and basically every government benefit I have ever encountered someone needing, and while the law review article cites the FAQ, it doesn’t provide the full context of the FAQ saying it’s optional if you have a passport, and then listing examples of where it might be needed. In those examples, the relevant government webpages all state they accept passports as proof within the U.S. the FAQ is also inconsistent with the AAO ruling I linked to earlier.
 

Newish to the sponsoring a spouse world, but been involved with immigration world for a long time, and I don’t know anyone who has ever been asked to show a naturalization certificate or citizenship certificate if they have a passport. It’s conclusive evidence of citizenship per both BIA and USCIS AAO.
 

Many people want one to be safe, and that’s their choice, but it’s factually wrong to state that a passport issued by DoS is not conclusive proof of citizenship. Whether the costs are worth the benefits a personal choice, not a legal necessity.

 

Anyway, someone should split this thread.

 

Edit: saw @Dashinka’s linked post after this. The states where it’s needed to register to vote or one of the federal jobs where it’s needed make sense; though most federal jobs confirm citizenship via SSA these days. Both of those are fairly rare use cases, though.

Edited Monday at 05:40 PM by S2N

[Dashinka 25,706]

4 minutes ago, S2N said:

Just to use SSA as an example, they list a passport on the list of things they accept for proof of change in citizenship status higher than a CoC: link

Passport is also accepted as definitive proof for form I-9, Real ID, and basically every government benefit I have ever encountered someone needing, and while the law review article cites the FAQ, it doesn’t provide the full context of the FAQ saying it’s optional if you have a passport, and then listing examples where the relevant government webpages all state they accept passports as proof within the U.S. the FAQ is also inconsistent with the AAO ruling I linked to earlier.
 

Newish to the sponsoring a spouse world, but been involved with immigration world for a long time, and I don’t know anyone who has ever been asked to show a naturalization certificate or citizenship certificate if they have a passport. It’s conclusive evidence of citizenship per both BIA and USCIS AAO.
 

Many people want one to be safe, and that’s their choice, but it’s factually wrong to state that a passport issued by DoS is not conclusive proof of citizenship. Whether the costs are worth the benefits a personal choice, not a legal necessity.

 

Anyway, someone should split this thread.

 

Edit: saw @Dashinka’s linked post after this. The states where it’s needed to register to vote or one of the federal jobs where it’s needed make sense; though most federal jobs confirm citizenship via SSA these days. Both of those are fairly rare use cases, though.

I agree, the passport issued properly should be all anyone needs for proof of being a USC.

[mam521 2,468]

58 minutes ago, Dashinka said:

I agree, the passport issued properly should be all anyone needs for proof of being a USC.

Considering you need either a birth certificate or a naturalization certificate, I'd agree.  But it's the derivatives who either never get a passport or let theirs lapse or lose it that don't have the certificate.  If you're on the ball and keep it valid, sure.  That said, only 48% of Americans actually have a passport.  I'd be curious to know what percentage are born Americans vs what percentage are naturalized/derivative citizens.  

[Dashinka 25,706]

6 minutes ago, mam521 said:

Considering you need either a birth certificate or a naturalization certificate, I'd agree.  But it's the derivatives who either never get a passport or let theirs lapse or lose it that don't have the certificate.  If you're on the ball and keep it valid, sure.  That said, only 48% of Americans actually have a passport.  I'd be curious to know what percentage are born Americans vs what percentage are naturalized/derivative citizens.  

Just my guess, but I would assume most of that 48% would be natural born USCs as most naturalized USCs most likely have a reason to maintain a passport, but I suppose there are naturalized USCs that do not plan to travel regularly internationally.  Just in my own little world, of my seven siblings, four of them have never applied for a passport and two more only travel internationally rarely so would not keep it up, and we were all born here. 

[S2N 214]

57 minutes ago, mam521 said:

Considering you need either a birth certificate or a naturalization certificate, I'd agree.  But it's the derivatives who either never get a passport or let theirs lapse or lose it that don't have the certificate.  If you're on the ball and keep it valid, sure.  That said, only 48% of Americans actually have a passport.  I'd be curious to know what percentage are born Americans vs what percentage are naturalized/derivative citizens.  

That’s not true, though. The Department of State issuing a passport is definitive proof of US citizenship even in derivative citizenship cases, and claiming otherwise is factually incorrect. You can renew a passport with an expired passport within the last five years, and if you have derivative and let it lapse for more than five years, you can request DoS search its files to show proof of having issued a passport and you can then apply to renew it with their record search as proof of citizenship. Same if it’s lost. travel.state.gov makes it clear.

 

All of which is cheaper and quicker than an N-600. I get that people might want an N-600 because it makes them feel safer, but there’s not been one example given of an actual use case where the claimed federal government benefit lists a CoC in preference to a passport. If people want to get one that’s completely fine, but they should know what the facts are and what the government itself claims.

 

—SSA: their website lists passport above CoC when changing status

—Passport: initial one can be obtained without a CoC, be renewed within 5 years of expiration with an expired passport, and if lost or outdated can conduct a search of passport records and reissue

—Employment: I-9 lists passport; most federal jobs do not require physical proof of citizenship and just confirm via SSA these days (you file OF-306 and they do it that way)

— State ID: states accept passports as proof of U.S. citizenship for Real ID purposes

Voting: not sure which states require this and not a passport, but if that’s the case it’d be rare.

 

I’m more than happy to admit I’m wrong if someone can provide an example of a specific federal government benefit that lists a CoC as being accepted as proof of citizenship but passports not being accepted. Not anecdotal experiences of individual employees not knowing what’s on the government’s own website.

 

If we’re going to be telling people that it is highly suggested to pay over $1000 we need facts of where the government prefers it. So far I can’t find a single example of the government ever claiming that other than vague language on a USCIS FAQ that is easily refuted by looking up the benefits,

Edited Monday at 07:44 PM by S2N