Ambiguities in US & Treaty Law Deny Due Process
When Immigration/Naturalization Collides With Extradition!

Unreliable Evidence Should Never Be Allowed in Extradition and/or the Naturalization Process; especially when it’s Politically Motivated

'Suspicion of Wrongdoing' is Not and Should Not Be an INS Standard for Denial of Naturalization

Heightened Scrutiny Should Be Required When Extradition Collides with the Naturalization Process | Questions of Due Process and Evidence Burdens in the Naturalization Process Are Compounded By Certain Extradition Requests

When Extradition collides with the Naturalization process, serious questions are raised:

Should an applicant who complies with the US law (and INS process) be denied citizenship based on 'bare extradition allegations' of another country?

• Should a politically motivated foreign allegation be sufficient to deny an applicant US citizenship?
• Should the INS be allowed - not to make a DECISION on US citizenship?
• Does a foreign country have the power to interfere with our naturalization process with allegations made of mere suspicion?
• Should an applicant be entitled to due process (notice and hearing) consistent with US evidence laws requiring his accuser to produce reliable evidence (i.e.: ‘preponderance’ or 'clear and convincing evidence' - if not ‘beyond a reasonable doubt’) subject to cross-examination, foundation and authenticity requirements in the Naturalization process?
• Should an applicant be entitled to due process (notice and hearing) consistent with US evidence laws requiring his accuser to produce reliable evidence (i.e.: ‘preponderance’ or 'clear and convincing evidence' - if not ‘beyond a reasonable doubt’) subject to cross-examination, foundation and authenticity requirements in the US extradition court?
• Should an applicant be entitled to due process (notice and opportunity to be heard) consistent with US evidence laws requiring his accuser to produce reliable evidence (i.e.: ‘preponderance’ or 'clear and convincing evidence' - if not ‘beyond a reasonable doubt’) subject to cross-examination, foundation and authenticity requirements in the US extradition and INS courts when the Naturalization process contains an extradition request (or when the extradition hearings contain a Naturalization request)?
• Should an applicant be entitled to a heightened due process (notice and opportunity to be heard) consistent with US evidence laws requiring his accuser to produce reliable evidence (i.e.: ‘preponderance’ or 'clear and convincing evidence' - if not ‘beyond a reasonable doubt’) subject to cross-examination, foundation and authenticity requirements in the US extradition and INS courts when the Naturalization process contains an extradition request (or when the extradition hearings contain a Naturalization request)?