921 F.3d 401
3rd Cir.2019Background
- Edwin Rafael Cepeda Cabrera, born in the Dominican Republic (1979), was admitted to the U.S. as a lawful permanent resident in 1988 and adopted by U.S. citizen Randolph Attenborough in 1990.
- Section 309 of the INA (8 U.S.C. § 1409) grants automatic derivative citizenship in certain out-of-wedlock father-child situations, but does not extend that automatic route to adopted children; adopted children instead relied on a different statutory path (former INA § 322) requiring affirmative petitioning before age 18.
- In 2014 Cabrera pled guilty to federal conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute heroin, was sentenced to 36 months, and was placed in removal proceedings based on aggravated felony and controlled-substance convictions.
- Cabrera contended he was a U.S. citizen via derivative citizenship through his adoptive father and raised an equal protection challenge to Section 309’s differential treatment of adopted children, arguing it violated the Fifth Amendment.
- The Immigration Judge declined jurisdiction over the constitutional claim and ordered removal; the BIA affirmed. Cabrera petitioned for review in the Third Circuit and also had two Form N-600 applications denied by USCIS.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Section 309’s exclusion of adopted children from automatic derivative citizenship violates equal protection under the Fifth Amendment | Cabrera: exclusion of adopted children is disparate treatment lacking sufficient justification and thus unconstitutional | Government: distinction is subject to rational-basis review and is rationally related to legitimate interests (ties, fraud prevention, protecting alien parents) | Court applied rational-basis review and upheld Section 309 as rationally related to legitimate government interests; petition denied |
| Proper standard of review for adoptive-status classifications in citizenship context | Cabrera: argued for rational-basis (did not press heightened scrutiny) | Government: urged rational-basis review; courts have not treated adopted children as a suspect class | Court held rational-basis review applies |
| Whether Government interests proffered are legitimate | Cabrera: challenged relation/necessity | Government: asserted promoting real parent-child ties, preventing immigration fraud, protecting rights of alien parents | Court found the interests legitimate |
| Whether Section 309 is rationally related to those interests | Cabrera: argued the classification is not rationally related and is arbitrary | Government: argued petition requirement for adopted children increases certainty of genuine relationship and allows investigation, and protects biological parents’ role | Court concluded the statute is rationally related to legitimate interests and upheld it |
Key Cases Cited
- Bagot v. Ashcroft, 398 F.3d 252 (3d Cir. 2005) (use of law effective at time of birth/adoption governs citizenship claims)
- Dia v. Ashcroft, 353 F.3d 228 (3d Cir. 2003) (constitutional claims reviewed de novo)
- Tuan Anh Nguyen v. INS, 533 U.S. 53 (2001) (recognizing government interest in fostering real ties between child and citizen parent)
- Pollard, 326 F.3d 397 (3d Cir. 2003) (explaining rational-basis review threshold)
- Real Alts., Inc. v. Sec’y Dep’t of Health & Human Servs., 867 F.3d 338 (3d Cir. 2017) (standard for equal protection review under rational basis)
- Brian B. ex rel. Lois B. v. Pa. Dep’t of Educ., 230 F.3d 582 (3d Cir. 2000) (challenger must negate every conceivable justification under rational basis)
- Dent v. Sessions, 900 F.3d 1075 (9th Cir. 2018) (upholding adoptive-status distinction under rational basis; preventing immigration fraud legitimate)
- Smart v. Ashcroft, 401 F.3d 119 (2d Cir. 2005) (adopted children not a protected class; rational-basis applies)
- Brehm v. Harris, 619 F.2d 1016 (3d Cir. 1980) (adoptive-status distinctions analyzed under rational basis in social security context)
- FCC v. Beach Commc’ns., Inc., 508 U.S. 307 (1993) (rational-basis inquiry permits rational speculation without empirical support)
- Catwell v. Att’y Gen. of U.S., 623 F.3d 199 (3d Cir. 2010) (recognizing government interest in protecting rights of alien parents)
- Bangura v. Hansen, 434 F.3d 487 (6th Cir. 2006) (preventing immigration fraud is legitimate governmental interest)