Old driving violations now a bar to U.S. naturalization?

The heat is on.

As previously discussed in this corner, the Trump administration has been busy overhauling the US naturalization process to make it more challenging, if not psychologically forbidding, to apply for American citizenship.

For instance, the US Department of Homeland Security has recently resurrected the long-abandoned “neighborhood investigation” policy where neighbors, co-workers, and business associates of a naturalization applicant are interviewed as part of a rigorous vetting process to ferret out any disqualifying activity or behavior on the part of the latter, presently or in the past.

Additionally, and as a parallel requirement, the applicant’s good moral character (GMC) will also be weighed against any past conduct occurring not only within the required five-year statutory period but well beyond this timeline. This goes hand in hand with the newly established adjudication criteria under which passive proof of the applicant’s GMC is no longer considered determinative. Now, proactive evidence of the applicant’s behavior as an outstanding member of the community is a must.

Under the revised standard, therefore, conduct in the remote past that fails to meet the elevated GMC threshold can sink a citizenship application that would otherwise be deemed meritorious based on prior evaluatory methods.

A classic example is a minor traffic violation that occurred over a decade ago.

Absent any definitive proof of the discharge of the offense such as payment of a fine or an official court disposition, a naturalization applicant’s case runs the risk of being denied on GMC grounds.

Anecdotally, this is what happened recently to another lawyer’s client, who initially filed a naturalization case on his own. In that case, the submission of a clean driving record covering the most recent five-year period failed to convince the USCIS officer that the applicant possessed the required character to become a US citizen on account of a minor traffic violation that occurred 15 years prior.

The applicant, ill-advised as he was, had assumed quite erroneously that a five-year unblemished driving record was sufficient evidence to prove that a 15-year-old traffic citation had been resolved.

In the deeply skeptical mind of the USCIS adjudicating officer, however, it wasn’t enough. Thus, the case was denied on GMC grounds.

In another era, minor traffic infractions, unless habitual or allowed to remain unresolved, or unless otherwise aggravated by “driving under the influence” (DUI) violations, would not destroy a routine citizenship application. In fact, applicants were always afforded the opportunity, skeptical minds or not, to cure any evidentiary defect or omission.

A summary denial was unheard of during those glory days of imperfect but sensible American migration.

Nowadays, the outcome of a case will depend on the personal whim of an adjudicating officer.

Since USCIS officers may now deny a case without first issuing a Request for Evidence or a Notice of Intent to Deny, any missing evidence in a pending application, such as proof of payment of a fine or an official court disposition of a minor violation, can trigger an outright denial.

Although denied naturalization cases can still be appealed or refiled post-denial, the resulting inconvenience and additional expenses can put a heavy strain on many applicants, resulting in fewer applications.

Barring a major policy shift, therefore, decades-old traffic indiscretions can become a naturalization killer for some.