United States: Naturalization Applicants to Undergo Broader Good Moral Character Review Under New USCIS Guidance

U.S. law directs USCIS officers to evaluate a naturalization applicant’s good moral character on a case-by-case basis. USCIS reviews conduct and character within the applicant’s qualifying naturalization statutory period (five years or three years, depending on the basis of naturalization) as well as conduct outside that period. Typically, if the applicant’s history did not contain criminal offenses or other behavior identified as problematic under U.S. immigration law, then the good moral character test was deemed satisfied. In some cases where there was a negative history – for example, failure to pay child support – rectifying the issue and providing evidence that the applicant has changed the problematic behavior has been deemed sufficient.

Traditional bars to a finding of good moral character include permanent bars, such as aggravated felonies and crimes of violence, and conditional bars (those that can be overcome), such as controlled substance violations, two or more convictions for driving under the influence (DUI), false claim to U.S. citizenship, unlawful voter registration, or unlawful voting.

The new policy memorandum directs USCIS officers to place greater emphasis on whether a naturalization applicant possesses positive attributes to support approval of the naturalization application. This change suggests that an applicant may be asked to affirmatively assert good moral character factors by demonstrating qualities that USCIS considers to be positive. The memorandum lists some examples of such factors, including but not limited to sustained community involvement and contributions; family caregiving and responsibility; educational attainment and employment history; and length of lawful residence. It is not clear in what manner naturalization applicants would be required to make this showing. It could come in the form of a response to a request for evidence from USCIS, perhaps after a review of the applicant’s social media and online presence.

The policy memorandum includes in its list of disqualifying behaviors actions that, though lawful, may be deemed by the agency to be “inconsistent with civic responsibility within the community.” The guidance cites examples such as “reckless or habitual traffic infractions,” or “harassment or aggressive solicitation.”

Finally, the memorandum directs officers to focus greater attention on ensuring that applicants who have engaged in disqualifying acts are rehabilitated and reformed.

The full impact of the new policy will not be clear until USCIS begins to issue decisions informed by the new guidance. It is likely that applicants for naturalization will be subject to a closer review of their personal history, including their social media and online presence, and may be asked to provide additional evidence to the government. Naturalization applicants attending their USCIS interview may find that adjudicators engage in more in-depth questioning and fact-finding regarding their character and behavior. As a result of the enhanced review, applicants could see longer waits for decisions, greater uncertainty and, potentially, higher rates of denial. It is also possible that the new guidelines will be challenged in court.

Fragomen is closely following the implementation of the new policy guidance and will provide updates as trends emerge. Inquiries about naturalization can be directed to the Fragomen attorney with whom you work or submitted through Fragomen’s U.S. Naturalization Contact Form.