Written by attorneys — see sources below.
A constitutional grant of authority to Congress to establish a single nationwide standard governing the conditions under which noncitizens may become citizens. The clause ensures that naturalization criteria remain consistent across all states rather than varying by local law.
Ulysses Ulrich, a lawful permanent resident for five years, applies for citizenship in his home state. Federal officers approve the application under a statute requiring five years of continuous residence nationwide. The state cannot impose a longer residency period because the constitutional clause requires a single standard.
Una Ueda, an alien seeking naturalization, registers under a state law that imposes additional reporting duties not required by federal statute. Federal authorities determine that the state measure burdens the national process. The court holds the state law unenforceable because it interferes with the uniform rule Congress established.
In 1939 the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania adopted an Alien Registration Act requiring every alien eighteen years of age or older, with limited exceptions, to register annually with the Department of Labor and Industry, supply specified information plus any additional details the department might direct, pay a one-dollar annual fee, receive an identification card, carry the card at all times, and exhibit it on demand by any police officer or department agent. One alien and one naturalized citizen filed suit in federal district court against state officials charged with enforcing the statute and sought an injunction against its operation. A three-judge district court granted judgment on the pleadings in favor of the alien plaintiff and enjoined enforcement of the Act. The case reached the Supreme Court on direct appeal under section 266 of the Judicial Code, with probable jurisdiction noted on March 25, 1940. After the district court decision but before Supreme Court review, Congress on June 28, 1940 enacted a federal Alien Registration Act that requires a single registration of aliens fourteen years of age and older, collects detailed information plus additional matters prescribed by the Commissioner with the Attorney General's approval, mandates fingerprinting of all registrants, and directs that registration records be kept secret and released only to persons or agencies designated by the Commissioner with the Attorney General's approval. The federal statute contains no requirement that aliens carry identification cards for exhibition to police or other officials and punishes only willful failure to register. The Supreme Court therefore examined the Pennsylvania statute in light of the intervening federal legislation.
View caseUgo Ucelli, an undocumented child, attends public school under a state policy denying enrollment to certain noncitizens. Federal immigration authorities later evaluate his naturalization eligibility. The court notes that Congress alone sets the uniform criteria, so the state policy cannot alter the federal naturalization framework.
Since the late 19th century the United States has restricted immigration into this country. Unsanctioned entry is a crime and those who enter unlawfully are subject to deportation, yet a substantial number of persons have succeeded in unlawfully entering and now live within various States including Texas. In May 1975 the Texas Legislature revised its education laws to withhold state funds from local school districts for the education of children not legally admitted into the United States. The revision also authorized local districts to deny enrollment to such children under Tex. Educ. Code Ann. § 21.031. In September 1977 a class action was filed in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas on behalf of school-age children of Mexican origin residing in Smith County who could not establish legal admission. The suit challenged their exclusion from the Tyler Independent School District schools, and the State of Texas intervened as a defendant. After certifying a class of all undocumented school-age children of Mexican origin in the district, the court held an extensive hearing in December 1977. It found that the statute had neither the purpose nor effect of keeping illegal aliens out of Texas, that enrollment increases stemmed primarily from legal residents, and that barring undocumented children would save money but would not necessarily improve education quality. The Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit upheld the injunction. During 1978 and 1979 additional suits were filed in other Texas districts. The Judicial Panel on Multi-district Litigation consolidated them in the Southern District of Texas. After a hearing the district court held the statute violated equal protection, the Court of Appeals summarily affirmed, and the Supreme Court noted probable jurisdiction and consolidated the cases.
View caseUlrike Ulrich receives a suspension of deportation from an immigration judge and applies for naturalization. Congress attempts to override the decision through a one-house veto. The court invalidates the veto because the naturalization power must be exercised through the uniform procedures Congress has enacted.
In 1966 Jagdish Rai Chadha, an East Indian born in Kenya who held a British passport, was lawfully admitted to the United States on a nonimmigrant student visa that expired on June 30, 1972. In October 1973, the District Director of the Immigration and Naturalization Service informed Chadha that he had remained longer than permitted and was therefore deportable. Chadha conceded deportability but applied for suspension under section 244(a)(1) of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952. On June 25, 1974, an Immigration Judge acting on behalf of the Attorney General suspended Chadha's deportation and adjusted his status to permanent resident after finding that he satisfied the statutory criteria of seven years' continuous presence, good moral character, and extreme hardship. A report of the suspension was transmitted to Congress as required by the Act. On December 16, 1975, the House of Representatives passed a resolution disapproving the suspension for Chadha and five other aliens on the ground that they did not meet the statutory requirements, particularly as to hardship. Pursuant to the House resolution, the Immigration Judge reopened the deportation proceedings. Chadha moved to terminate them on constitutional grounds, but the Immigration Judge ruled that he lacked authority to declare the resolution unconstitutional and ordered Chadha deported. Chadha appealed to the Board of Immigration Appeals, which likewise held that it had no authority to pass on the constitutionality of the resolution and dismissed the appeal. Chadha then filed a petition for review in the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. The Immigration and Naturalization Service appeared and urged the court to hold the House resolution unconstitutional. After inviting briefs from the Senate and House as amici curiae, the Court of Appeals held the resolution unconstitutional because it was a legislative act that failed to satisfy the requirements of Article I, sections 1 and 7, and set aside the deportation order. The Supreme Court granted certiorari in the consolidated cases to address the constitutional question.
View caseUmar Usmani, a naturalized citizen, applies for a federal civil service position. An agency regulation bars noncitizens from the job even after naturalization. The court examines whether the regulation respects the uniform federal standard for citizenship status.
Five Chinese aliens lawfully admitted for permanent residence brought this litigation after each was denied federal employment solely because of alienage. Mow Sun Wong, admitted in 1969 after working as an electrical engineer in China, participated in the California Supplemental Training and Education Program and was assigned to the General Services Administration but could not obtain a janitor position. Siu Hung Mok, admitted in 1968 with eighteen years of business experience in China, likewise participated in the STEP program and was assigned to the Federal Records Center of GSA but could not retain a file clerk position. Kae Cheong Lui performed satisfactory work for the Post Office Department for ten days before termination when his personnel record showed he was not a citizen. Francene Lum, admitted in 1946 with fifteen years of teaching experience and a master's degree in education, was not permitted to take an examination for an evaluator position in the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. Anna Yu, admitted in 1965, was barred from taking a typing test for a clerk-typist position. Two of the plaintiffs had filed declarations of intent to become citizens while the other three had not. On December 22, 1970, the five plaintiffs commenced a class action in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California naming the Chairman and Commissioners of the Civil Service Commission and the heads of the three agencies that had denied them employment. The complaint alleged that approximately four million aliens reside in the United States, that about three hundred thousand federal jobs become available each year, and that noncitizens are generally barred from competing for those positions. The District Court rejected a jurisdictional challenge but ruled for the defendants on the merits after defendants moved to dismiss and plaintiffs moved for summary judgment supported by affidavits. Four plaintiffs appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. While the appeal was pending for over two years, the Supreme Court decided Sugarman v. Dougall and In re Griffiths on June 25, 1973. The Court of Appeals reversed the District Court judgment. Only the Chairman and Commissioners of the Civil Service Commission petitioned for certiorari. In 1971 Congress established the United States Postal Service and removed its officers and employees from the jurisdiction of the Civil Service Commission. In 1974 the Postal Service amended its regulation to make noncitizens who have permanent resident alien status eligible for most positions. The Supreme Court granted certiorari to decide whether the Civil Service Commission regulation barring resident aliens from federal competitive civil service employment is constitutional. The regulation at issue, 5 CFR § 338.101, provided that a person may be admitted to competitive examination or given appointment only if a citizen of or owing permanent allegiance to the United States, with limited exceptions for executive assignments when no qualified citizens are available. The Commission construed the permanent allegiance category to cover only natives of American Samoa.
View caseUnity Underhill, a lawful permanent resident, faces state criminal charges for failure to carry registration documents required only by state law. Federal officers intervene, asserting that enforcement disrupts the single national naturalization process. The court finds the state measure preempted by the constitutional requirement of uniformity.
In 2010, the State of Arizona enacted the Support Our Law Enforcement and Safe Neighborhoods Act, commonly known as S. B. 1070. The statute's stated purpose is to discourage and deter the unlawful entry and presence of aliens and economic activity by persons unlawfully present in the United States. Arizona officials described the law as establishing a policy of attrition through enforcement. S. B. 1070 contains four provisions that became the focus of litigation. Section 3 makes it a state misdemeanor to willfully fail to complete or carry an alien registration document in violation of federal law. Section 5(C) makes it a misdemeanor for an unauthorized alien to knowingly apply for work, solicit work in a public place, or perform work as an employee or independent contractor in Arizona. Section 6 authorizes state and local officers to arrest without a warrant a person whom the officer has probable cause to believe has committed any public offense that makes the person removable from the United States. Section 2(B) requires officers conducting a stop, detention, or arrest to make reasonable efforts, in some circumstances, to verify the person's immigration status with the Federal Government. The United States filed suit against Arizona in the United States District Court for the District of Arizona, seeking to enjoin enforcement of these provisions. The District Court issued a preliminary injunction preventing the four provisions from taking effect. The Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed the injunction in 2011. Arizona experiences significant effects from unlawful immigration. Hundreds of thousands of deportable aliens are apprehended in the State each year, and unauthorized aliens are estimated to comprise almost six percent of the population. In Maricopa County, which includes Phoenix, unauthorized aliens are reported to account for a disproportionate share of serious crime. The Supreme Court granted certiorari to review the Ninth Circuit's decision.
View caseThe clause grants Congress exclusive authority to set the conditions for noncitizens to become citizens. It requires that those conditions apply uniformly across the entire United States. States may not create their own conflicting naturalization standards.
Supporting sources
No. The clause demands a single federal standard, so state laws that add burdens or alter eligibility conflict with federal authority. Courts have struck down such measures when they regulate the same subject as federal naturalization statutes.
Supporting sources
Yes. The clause requires that naturalization rules be established through constitutionally permissible means. A one-house veto over individual naturalization decisions violates separation of powers even though Congress holds plenary power over the subject.
Supporting sources
The clause supports federal supremacy in setting naturalization standards. When states enact enforcement schemes that conflict with the uniform federal framework, courts find those schemes preempted.
…the Necessary and Proper Clause, U. S. Const., Art. I, § 8, cl. 18. It is argued that Congress' Art. I power "To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization," combined with the Necessary and Proper Clause, grants it unreviewable authority over the regulation of aliens. The plenary authority of Congress over aliens under Art. I, § 8, cl. 4, is…