Whenever a diplomatic or consular officer of the United States has reason to believe that a person while in a foreign state has lost his United States nationality under any provision of part III of this subchapter, or under any provision of chapter IV of the Nationality Act of 1940, as amended, he shall certify the facts upon which such belief is based to the Department of State, in writing, under regulations prescribed by the Secretary of State. If the report of the diplomatic or consular officer is approved by the Secretary of State, a copy of the certificate shall be forwarded to the Attorney General, for his information, and the diplomatic or consular office in which the report was made shall be directed to forward a copy of the certificate to the person to whom it relates. Approval by the Secretary of State of a certificate under this section shall constitute a final administrative determination of loss of United States nationality under this chapter, subject to such procedures for administrative appeal as the Secretary may prescribe by regulation, and also shall constitute a denial of a right or privilege of United States nationality for purposes of section 1503 of this title.
Notes of Decisions
Gerald Farrell v. Antony Blinken, 4 F.4th 124 (D.C. Cir. 2021).
· cites it 7× “8 U.S.C. § 1501 (“Approval [of a CLN] shall constitute a final administrative determination of loss of United States nationality.”
L. David Bensky v. Colin Powell, Sec'y of State, 391 F.3d 894 (7th Cir. 2004).
· cites it 2× “All this was done pursuant to the procedure for expatriation set forth in 8 U.S.C. § 1501 . In 1985, Bensky filed an appeal with the State Department’s Board of Appellate Review from the Department’s approval in 1964 of the Certificate of Loss of Nationality.”
Lozada Colon v. US Dept. of State, 2 F. Supp. 2d 43 (D.D.C. 1998).
· cites it 3× “If approved, a Certificate of Loss of Nationality would issue to the Plaintiff, as prescribed in § 358 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1501 . Nearly a year after Plaintiff had taken his oath of renunciation, the Secretary of State still had not returned a…”
Weber v. United States Dep't of State, 885 F. Supp. 2d 46 (D.D.C. 2012).
· cites it 2× “See 8 U.S.C. § 1501 , 22 C.F.R. § 50.50 (b) (once consular officer makes a report with certification of facts supporting belief that person has lost U.”
Robert E. Whitehead v. Alexander M. Haig, Jr., Sec'y of State, of the United States Appeal of Robert E. Whitehead, 794 F.2d 115 (3rd Cir. 1986).
· cites it 2× “The American Embassy in Tokyo forwarded a Certificate of Loss of Nationality, pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1501 , see footnote 2 infra, together with other papers related to Whitehead’s renunciation, to the Department of State on April 19, 1965, and on April 30, 1965, the Department…”
Henry v. Quarantillo, 684 F. Supp. 2d 298 (E.D.N.Y 2010).
“4305, 4309 (codified as amended at 8 U.S.C. § 1501 (2006)). This amendment, coming in the wake of the debate in the courts, suggests that Congress agreed that it was problematic to allow a § 1503(a) action to be brought on the basis of a denied passport application years or…”
Laurence J. Terrazas v. Cyrus Vance, Sec'y of State, 577 F.2d 7 (7th Cir. 1978).
“See 8 U.S.C. § 1501 . 7 . It is less than clear whether plaintiff knew at the time he was asked to fill out these documents that he was making in essence an application for a Certificate of Loss of Nationality.”
Lozada Colon v. United States Dep't of State, 170 F.3d 191 (D.C. Cir. 1999).
“We agree with the District Court that mandamus relief is inappropriate here, because 8 U.S.C. § 1501 clearly affords the Secretary discretion to determine whether a Certificate of Loss of Nationality should be issued.”
Kahane v. Shultz, 653 F. Supp. 1486 (E.D.N.Y 1987).
“See 8 U.S.C. § 1501 . The CLN was approved on October 2, 1985 by Carmen A.”
Varela-Fernandez v. Burgos, 81 F. Supp. 2d 297 (D.P.R. 1999).
“8 U.S.C. § 1501 ). 7 . Alternatively, this Court notes that even if respondent had not waived immunity, the Eleventh Amendment permits a federal court to “enjoin state officials to conform future conduct to the requirements of federal law.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.