The Department of State and U.S. Consular Officers Abroad in Citizenship Determinations

Abstract

In his dissent in the 1958 case of Perez v. Brownell (356 U.S. 44) Chief Justice Warren stated: The fatal defect in the statute before us is that its application is not limited to those situations that may rationally be said to constitute an abandonment of citizenship. In specifying that any act of voting in a foreign political election results in loss of citizen? ship, Congress has employed a classification so broad that it encom? passes conduct that fails to show a voluntary abandonment of citizen? ship_ Prescient and perceptive consular officers of the Department of State were apprehensive; the Chief Justice was seeking to introduce into the determination of loss of U.S. citizenship the element of in? tent?an element the statute carefully excluded. Of course, in some instances the state of mind of the individual has always been pertinent to such determinations, such as where it is claimed that the expatriative act was performed involuntarily or under duress. But, for the most part, the performance of the objective act defined by the law?e.g., voting in a foreign political election; taking an oath of allegiance to a foreign state; serving in the armed forces of a foreign state; holding an office, post or employment under the government of a foreign state?was determinative and the intentions or motives of the individual