The Supreme Court took the logic of the Trump administration to task this week, and they were horrified at the results. At issue was the topic of naturalized citizenship, and whether the government may revoke the citizenship of Americans who made even trivial misstatements in their naturalization proceedings.
Robert A. Parker, representing the Justice Department, took the most hard-line stance possible. And even the more conservative justices were incredulous at Parker’s black and white approach. Chief Justice John Roberts attempted to show how ridiculous this argument could be by confessing to a minor crime of this own:
“Some time ago, outside the statute of limitations, I drove 60 miles an hour in a 55-mile-an-hour zone… If I answer that question no, 20 years after I was naturalized as a citizen, you can knock on my door and say, ‘Guess what, you’re not an American citizen after all’?
Parker would not budge.
The Justices continued to press Parker to admit how ridiculous his argument seemed. If the government wins the case, then prosecutors would have almost endless power to strip naturalized Americans of their citizenship if they can prove the person made any sort of false statement at all during the naturalization process. It wouldn’t matter how small or immaterial the statement.
That didn’t sit well with most of the justices. Justice Anthony M. Kennedy was particularly outraged:
“Your argument is demeaning the priceless value of citizenship. You’re arguing for the government of the United States, talking about what citizenship is and ought to mean.”
Most of the rest of the time the justices explored what causal relationship the government had to prove between the lie and the grant of citizenship.
As a lawyer, I know that you can sometimes read oral arguments from a particular Supreme Court case and have no idea what way the justices are going to rule. In this case, it seems pretty clear they’ve already made their decision. And as usual, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg offered the best zinger of the day:
“This may be a simple-minded question, but how can an immaterial statement procure naturalization?”
The question, of course, already had an answer. Just like Parker had already lost the argument.
You don’t mess with RBG.
Want a short explanation of how the Supreme Court works? Check this out.
Featured Image: Screenshot Via YouTube Video.
