Citizenship denied - advice please

[cguo7]

Hello,

 

My husband just recieved a letter in the mail denying his naturalization. I was a little surprised since I did not personally know of anyone who had not passed before. The reason has to do with him being a former CCP member. Below is an excerpt of his letter:

 

On October 5, 2009, you obtained permanent residence status through your spouse in immigrant classification Ir1. USCIS received your form N-400 on June 24, 2013, and on September 11, 2013, you appeared for an interview to determine your eligibility for naturalization.

 

During the naturalization interview and review of your application, the Immigration Services Officer asked you about your involvement in the Communist Party. You stated that you were a member of the Communist Party and that you stopped paying the membership fee since 2008. You also stated that you joined the Communist Party for a better future.

 

According to your statement, you had a been a member of the Communist Party within the 10-year period immediately preceding the filing of your application for naturalization on June 2, 2013. Your membership was voluntary since you stated that no one forced you to join the Communist Party. You did not terminate your membership of or affiliatioin with the Communist Party prior to becoming 16 years of age because at the time you stopped paying membership fee, you were in the age of around 26 years old (2008).

 

Based on the foregoing, you are ineligible for naturalization because you failed to establish an attachment to the principles of the US Constitution and be disposed to the good order and happiness of the US.

 

My questions are these:

 

1.) The letter goes on to explain how we can overcome the grounds for denial by submitting a Form N-336. The cost is around $600 to do this and it doesn't seem likely the decision will be overturned (but I really don't know how high the rate of overturned appeals are). Has anyone had to go through this process and what more could we possibly say to help his cause? He joined the CCP in his mid twenties for a chance at a better job position (but did not get the job in the end) and said that once someone stops paying their dues after 6 months, they are not a part of the CCP anymore. He stopped in 2009 sometime.

 

2.) I looked online about non-profit immigration organizations but haven't found very many in the Sacramento, CA area. Does anyone have any experience with these types of organizations and do you think they will help our cause?

 

3.) My husband doesn't want to appeal because of the cost (it is a lot for us) but I'm afraid this will somehow affect his chance either at extending his 10 yr green card or another try at naturalization in the future. Can anyone elaborate on this?

 

4.) What do we have to prove with this sentence? He is a law abiding citizen, he pays taxes, he hasn't been in any trouble with the law. I'm really not sure how to interpret this...

Based on the foregoing, you are ineligible for naturalization because you failed to establish an attachment to the principles of the US Constitution and be disposed to the good order and happiness of the US.

 

 

My husband said that when he faced the interviewer, he felt the officer was already in a bad mood and was not friendly in any way. The officer had a thick accent, so when my husband asked if he could ask the same question again, the officer barked that he should be able to understand and answer the question if he wanted to be an American citizen. The officer then asked my husband about the CCP connection and my husband said that a letter had been enclosed in the packet, but the officer insisted on asking him a lot of the questions. I can understand this, maybe he wanted my husband to elaborate on his answers. The officer sent him home with a paper that said he didn't pass the US History portion, We thought we would get a letter asking him to come back for another interview to retake the portion he failed. We were very surprised he received this letter. Based on what my husband relayed to me, I feel like the officer was in a bad mood and chose my husband as a whipping boy. My husband is a very hard worker and a humble person. I know of other people whose character could be questioned and were once CCP members that have become citizens. I feel that this situation with the officer and his treatment of my husband was unfair. Could anyone offer advice, please?

 

Thank you,

 

Christal

[Mick]

First of, let me say I am so sorry to hear of this. It seems USCIS is intent on making things as difficult as possible. Second, I have no real knowledge of what to do as I have never dealt with this kind of situation before. I am sure, however, that someone here on the board may have some concrete ideas.

 

What I want to say is this: the letter you received seems to be very bizarre. It doesn't make sense on several levels and on top of that, the English used is kind of strange. For example, that business about being "disposed to the good order and happiness of the US" just seems to be an odd way of saying something. Also, the language that says "You were in the age of around 26 years old" is quite awkward. It may be that I am a writer by trade and have done more than my share of editing, so perhaps I am just picking nits here. But it just seems kind of strange to me.

 

The reason I say it doesn't make sense relates to the paragraph that begins with "based on the foregoing, you are ineligible for naturalization because you failed to establish an attachment to the principles of the US Constitution blah blah blah....My point here is that it says your denial is "based on the foregoing" but then goes on to say your denial is for failure to establish....and that business about good order and happiness, etc. If you look at the "foregoing," it is all about the past membership in the CCCP and says nothing about failure to establish and being disposed to good order and happiness.

 

Also, I went back and reviewed our letters from USCIS regarding naturalization. In none of those letters did they use the abbreviation US. It was also stated United States or in two cases, U.S.A. (never without periods).

 

Sorry if I may have muddied the waters here, but it just seemed to me that this use of the language was not what one would expect in such an important document.

 

I wish you guys well in dealing with this. Hang in there.

Edited September 14, 2013 by Mick (see edit history)

[dnoblett]

Looks like they are sticking to the 10 year rule for past membership to the party. Yes you can try again around 2019 ten years after leaving the party,

The other issue was how it was said "joined party for a better future" it would have been better to have said joined because it was a requirement of employment. Better future sounds too much like he felt that communism is the better system of government. Needed to make it like a job requirement, the same as me, I joined a union as conditions of the job I do, does not mean I agree with the union on most things.

Also this should not affect renewing green card.

[cguo7]

thank you both for your comments and advice. I thought it might have something to do with a 10 year rule, this confirmed it for me. I didn't really think they would follow it though, because I know a few people who were part of the CCP and still recieved citizenship before their 10 year mark.

[dnoblett]

It really boils down to how the interviewing officer feels where a person's loyalty lies. I know of at least one that demonstrated that they had joined the party strictly for work, and provided same letter used at time of visa interview to the citizenship officer they accepted this and approved citizenship.

[Randy W]

Yeah, that's nasty! It's hard to believe they would expect you to tiptoe around the membership issue like that, but maybe Dan nailed it there with the comment about "better future".

 

I would think wanting a "better future" would be part of anyone's "dream" - including those who live in China.

 

But maybe we should be advising people to state their CCP membership in neutral terms. But of the THIRD hand, maybe it was simply the fact that he wasn't required to join that ticked off the Immigrations Officer.

 

I agree, though - waiting for the 10 year anniversary would seem to be an expedient path, especially since he's already got his 10 year card!

[johnxiaoying]

I haven't seen a need for my wife to be in a big hurry to do the citizenship thing. Get to vote - woopee. The downside to citizenship is getting to pay $200 for a China visa to go home for a visit.

 

In the future state the reason for joining the party as a prerequisite to getting a half-ass decent job. The party members I know didn't join because of a profound love for the party, just a chance at a better future.

 

My wife is nearing the end of her ten year green card so she'll likely be doing the citizenship thing in '14.

[dnoblett]

John, not just vote, one big reason citizenship is desired may be to petition a parent sibling or older child.

 

Also a China visit visa is not $200 more like $130

[johnxiaoying]

 

Also a China visit visa is not $200 more like $130

 

Yes, $140 if you're near a China Embassy or Consulate. I just paid $200 to a service to act as my agent.

[asano]

The other issue I think is that not everyone who joins the party actually obtains employment that requires party membership. Many companies in China like to hire people who are party members but they do not require you to be a party member for a position. Therefore, many people join the party hoping to obtain a good job, but many take jobs that do not require the party membership, I would argue the majority of the Chinese Communist Party's 80 million members are in this situation.

 

I believe that this creates a larger issue for these type of people when they come to the US because the laws state that for them to obtain an exception they need to prove their affiliation with the party was necessary to obtain employment. There is no way for them to do that as the law is currently stated, unless their employer is willing to give them a document stating that it was necessary (and I doubt many employers will do this unless it was required). Many of these people also joined the party in college due to pressure from professors, relatives, or colleagues, because they believed it was beneficial for them to do so. This then creates a huge issue for them when they come to the US even though the likelihood of them being a "risk or a threat" is minimal.

 

cguo7, I'm sorry to hear about your spouse's situation. You may want to try getting in touch with University of the Pacific, McGeorge School of Law in Sacramento. They have an immigration legal clinic for the community. I'm not sure if they'd be able to help you but you may want to talk to them and see. The school's main # is 916.739.7191 .