In Flores-Villar v. United States, a case recently argued before the U.S. Supreme Court, Ruben Flores-Villar claimed laws pertaining to U.S. citizenship promoted unconstitutional gender-based discrimination. Flores-Villar claimed an equal protection violation and argued the federal immigration law applied to determine his U.S. citizenship treats the child of an unwed U.S. citizen father differently then the child of an unwed U.S. citizen mother; thus, resulting in unconstitutional gender-based discrimination. Ultimately, Flores-Villar wants derivative U.S. citizenship based upon his father’s U.S. citizenship.
Flores-Villar was born in Mexico to unmarried parents. Flores-Villar’s father is a U.S. citizen and his mother is Mexican citizen. The law in effect when Flores-Villar was born, states unwed fathers had to meet certain U.S. residency requirements while unwed mothers did not. In order for an unwed U.S. citizen father to transmit citizenship to a child born outside the U.S. the father must have been physically present in the United States for a total of ten years, at least five years of which were after his fourteenth birthday but prior to the child’s birth. In Flores-Villar’s situation this requirement presents and impossiblity because Flores-Villar’s father was sixteen when Flores-Villar was born and at that time only unwed fathers nineteen years of age could transmit U.S. citizenship. Without U.S. citizenship Flores-Villar was deported for committing a drug-related offense and later charged with unlawful presence in the U.S. when he tried to return.
Eight of the nine Supreme Court Justices participated in the case, Justice Kagan recused herself. At this time no decision has been made please return for updates.