Congress enacted 8 U.S.C. \u00a7 1440 to provide noncitizens serving in the U.S. armed forces with an expedited path to naturalization during periods of hostility. Congress expressly required the executive to make two threshold determinations before a military member can be considered for naturalization under this statute. First, the executive must certify that an applicant has \u201cserved honorably.\u201d Second, the President must designate by executive order that the armed forces are \u201cengaged in military operations involving armed conflict with a hostile foreign force.\u201d Since the War on Terrorism began in 2001, the military had authorized any noncitizen serving in the military to qualify for expedited naturalization by certifying their service as \u201chonorable\u201d after just one day in the military. However, in 2017, the Trump administration implemented new regulations that required noncitizens to serve for at least six months prior to the military certifying their service as \u201chonorable.\u201d This policy spurred a number of legal challenges, creating a court split over the justiciability of the executive\u2019s determination of \u201chonorable service.\u201d This court split not only renews critical questions on the scope of judicial review over matters of military affairs, but it also provides an important preview into the amount of discretion that may be afforded to the executive to determine whether the U.S. remains in \u201ca period of armed conflict with a hostile foreign force.\u201d<\/p>\n
Continue reading Naturalizing Through Military Service: Who Decides?<\/strong><\/em><\/a> Congress enacted 8 U.S.C. \u00a7 1440 to provide noncitizens serving in the U.S. armed forces with an expedited path to naturalization during periods of hostility. Congress expressly required the executive […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1019,"featured_media":0,"parent":1079,"menu_order":5,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"abstract.php","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_price":"","_stock":"","_tribe_ticket_header":"","_tribe_default_ticket_provider":"","_tribe_ticket_capacity":"0","_ticket_start_date":"","_ticket_end_date":"","_tribe_ticket_show_description":"","_tribe_ticket_show_not_going":false,"_tribe_ticket_use_global_stock":"","_tribe_ticket_global_stock_level":"","_global_stock_mode":"","_global_stock_cap":"","_tribe_rsvp_for_event":"","_tribe_ticket_going_count":"","_tribe_ticket_not_going_count":"","_tribe_tickets_list":"[]","_tribe_ticket_has_attendee_info_fields":false,"footnotes":"","_tec_slr_enabled":"","_tec_slr_layout":""},"class_list":["post-1109","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"acf":[],"ticketed":false,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.law.georgetown.edu\/immigration-law-journal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/1109","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.law.georgetown.edu\/immigration-law-journal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.law.georgetown.edu\/immigration-law-journal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.law.georgetown.edu\/immigration-law-journal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1019"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.law.georgetown.edu\/immigration-law-journal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1109"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.law.georgetown.edu\/immigration-law-journal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/1109\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1110,"href":"https:\/\/www.law.georgetown.edu\/immigration-law-journal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/1109\/revisions\/1110"}],"up":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.law.georgetown.edu\/immigration-law-journal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/1079"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.law.georgetown.edu\/immigration-law-journal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1109"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
\n<\/span><\/p>\nGT-GILJ220025<\/a>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"