Featured Chrome Extensions:

Casey IRACs are produced by an AI that analyzes the opinion’s content to construct its analysis. While we strive for accuracy, the output may not be flawless. For a complete and precise understanding, please refer to the linked opinions above.

Keywords

statuteappealcitizenshipnaturalization
defendantappealcitizenship

Related Cases

McBrearty v. Perryman
View Case »
Tarubac v. Immigration and Naturalization Service
View Case »
Dulane v. Immigration and Naturalization Service
View Case »
Nowak v. Immigration and Naturalization Service
View Case »
Garcia v. Clinton
View Case »
Justia Law Link
LexisNexis Link
Westlaw Link
CourtListener Link
Oyez Link

Savorgnan v. United States

Facts

The petitioner, Rosette Sorge Savorgnan, was born in Wisconsin in 1915 and resided in the United States until July 1941. In March 1940, she applied for Italian citizenship to marry Alessandro Savorgnan, an Italian citizen. She was granted Italian citizenship in August 1940 and signed an oath of allegiance to the King of Italy in November 1940, which she did not fully understand. She married Savorgnan in December 1940 and moved to Italy in July 1941, where she lived until November 1945. Upon her return to the U.S., she requested to be recognized as an American citizen, which was denied, leading to this case.

The petitioner was born in Wisconsin in 1915 of native-born parents and resided in the United States until July, 1941. In March, 1940, her intended husband, Alessandro Savorgnan, was an Italian citizen, serving as Italian Vice Consul at St. Louis, Missouri. He informed her that, under Italian law, she would have to become an Italian citizen before he could obtain the necessary royal consent to their marriage. She applied for Italian citizenship. He prepared her application. It was in Italian which he understood, but which she did not understand. In August, the petitioner was granted Italian citizenship. In November, she appeared with Savorgnan at the Italian Consulate in Chicago, Illinois, and, in his presence, signed an instrument which contained an oath, in Italian, expressly renouncing her American citizenship and swearing her allegiance to the King of Italy.

Issue

The main legal issue is whether a native-born American citizen who became an Italian citizen and resided in Italy lost her American citizenship.

The question is whether, under the special circumstances of this case, a native-born American citizen who became an Italian citizen in 1940, and lived in Italy with her Italian husband from 1941 to 1945, nevertheless retained her American citizenship.

Rule

Under 2 of the Citizenship Act of 1907, any American citizen shall be deemed to have expatriated himself when he has been naturalized in any foreign state in conformity with its laws, or when he has taken an oath of allegiance to any foreign state.

The requirements for expatriation under 2 of the Citizenship Act of 1907 are objective. That section provides that 'any American citizen shall be deemed to have expatriated himself when he has been naturalized in any foreign state in conformity with its laws, or when he has taken an oath of allegiance to any foreign state.'

Analysis

The court analyzed the facts surrounding the petitioner's naturalization and residence in Italy. It concluded that her actions of obtaining Italian citizenship and taking an oath of allegiance to Italy constituted expatriation under the applicable statutes. The court emphasized that the statutory language did not require an intent to renounce citizenship for expatriation to occur, and that the petitioner had established residence in Italy, fulfilling the requirements for loss of American citizenship.

The court noted that there was no suggestion in the statutory language that the effect of the specified overt acts, when voluntarily done was conditioned upon the undisclosed intent of the person doing them.

Conclusion

The court affirmed the judgment of the Court of Appeals, concluding that the petitioner had expatriated herself by naturalizing as an Italian citizen and residing in Italy.

The judgment of the Court of Appeals, accordingly, is affirmed, and the case is remanded to the District Court with directions to dismiss the petition against the United States and to enter judgment in favor of the other defendants in conformity with this opinion.

Who won?

The United States prevailed in the case as the court upheld the finding that the petitioner had lost her American citizenship through her actions.

The United States prevailed in the case as the court upheld the finding that the petitioner had lost her American citizenship through her actions.

You must be