Martinez-Madera v. Holder (9th Cir. 2009)

Juan Martinez, the immigrant in this case was born in Mexico. Both his parents were Mexican citizens at the time of his birth, and they were not married, either. His biological parents split up soon after he was born and his mother became involved with another man who was a U.S. citizen. The couple married several years later and had several children together. The family moved to California from Mexico. The stepfather, for all intents and purposes, treated Martinez as if he were a natural born son. The stepfather raised him from the time he was an infant, and held him out to be his own child. The only thing he did not do was legally adopt Martinez. His mother later became a naturalized citizen, but Martinez did not benefit from this because he was over twenty-one years old at the time. He never himself applied for citizenship.

Forty years after coming to the U.S., Martinez pled guilty to attempted murder. He served eight years of prison. After he was released from prison, the government began removal proceedings against him on account of his conviction of an aggravated felony. In defense, Martinez argued that he was not removable because he was a U.S. citizen (the government does not have the authority to remove citizens). Although he was not born in the United States, he had derivative citizenship through his stepfather pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1401(g).

There are several ways in which a person may establish U.S. citizenship. Being born in the U.S. creates a presumption of citizenship. One other way is through naturalization, where a person applies to become a U.S. citizen after having lived in the country lawfully for several years. Yet another way is to serve in the U.S. military in a war zone during a time of war. Children of U.S. citizens who were born in a foreign country may also be considered citizens, but such persons must apply for recognition of their citizenship because anyone born outside the U.S. is presumptively an alien. A person who was born abroad to at least one parent who is a U.S. citizenship and who is himself or herself later recognized to be a citizen has benefited from derivative citizenship. Unlike naturalized citizens, once derivative citizenship is established, that status is retroactive to the time of birth. Natural born citizens are conferred this right through the U.S. Constitution. Derivative and naturalized citizens are conferred their rights through immigration statutes. The statutes regarding derivative citizenship status has changed several times throughout the years.

On appeal, the 9th Circuit resolved the question of whether or not the immigrant’s relationship to his stepfather conferred upon him derivative citizenship. Martinez argued that because his stepfather had treated him as a legitimate child from practically the time of his birth, he should be considered a natural born child of the stepfather, thus qualifying him for derivative citizenship. The court was not persuaded by his argument. The court pointed out that: 1) Martinez was born to Mexican parents in Mexico; 2) his mother did not marry the stepfather until several years after Martinez was born; 3) he had no blood relationship to any U.S. citizen at the time of his birth; 4) the stepfather never legally adopted him; and 5) even if the stepfather had adopted him, that still would not have qualified him for derivative citizenship under the immigration laws. The court determined that 8 U.S.C. § 1401(g) requires that in order to qualify for derivative citizenship, at least one of Martinez’s parents must have been married to a U.S. citizen at the time of his birth.

Despite the fact that Martinez had lived in the United States for over forty years and his stepfather treated him like a natural born son for almost his entire life, he was not considered a derivative citizen and thus he was ordered removed for committing an aggravated felony.