United States v. Farhane: Denaturalization

Part of the Trump administration’s all-out assault on immigrants and immigration was a concerted effort to ramp up denaturalization efforts. Although efforts at denaturalization had been primarily reserved for Nazis and war criminals, by the early 2000s, the government had expanded its efforts to strip individuals of citizenship who did not fit within either one of those categories. The Trump administration filed twice as many denaturalization cases in each of its first two years as the average number of denaturalization cases for the prior twelve years.

Abdulrahman Farhane, a Moroccan-born, naturalized Muslim American from Brooklyn was one of those targeted by the Trump administration. In 2006, following the advice of a lawyer, he pled guilty to federal charges. After serving 11 years, paying his debt to society, and securing early release due to his exemplary conduct, Mr. Farhane finally returned to his family and home in Brooklyn. Shortly after his release, however, he received a letter from the U.S. Department of Justice informing him that it would seek to revoke his U.S. citizenship. Mr. Farhane’s defense lawyer had failed to advise him that denaturalization could be a consequence of his guilty plea. Trump administration officials focused on him once he was finally home, in an apparent effort to strip as many Muslims and other “undesirables” as possible of their U.S. citizenship. Should that come to pass, Mr. Farhane would be deported after 30 years in this country, and two of his American-raised children would lose their U.S. citizenship, too.

CLEAR, along with co-counsel at Wilmer Hale, have sought to vacate Mr. Farhane’s guilty plea, on the grounds that he did not receive effective assistance of counsel because his lawyer failed to advise him of the denaturalization and deportation consequences of his plea.

The district court originally denied Mr. Farhane’s request to vacate his guilty plea in March 2020. Mr. Farhane appealed to the Second Circuit, and CLEAR’s director, Prof. Kassem argued the case on behalf of Mr. Farhane in November 2021. In August 2023, a three-judge panel of the Second Circuit voted 2-1 to uphold the conviction. Mr. Farhane petitioned for Second Circuit to rehear the case en banc, meaning before all the active judges of the Circuit. In an extremely rare move, the Second Circuit agreed to rehear the case. Prof. Kassem is set to argue the case before the en banc court on May 22, 2024.

PRESS:

“He pleaded guilty in a terrorism case and did his time. Now the government wants to strip him of his American citizenship”, Washington Post, 12/18/2021, VIEW

KEY DOCUMENTS:

U.S. v. Farhane, 2255 motion to vacate (Feb. 1, 2019)

U.S. v. Farhane, Gov’t opposition to 2255 (June 14, 2019)

U.S. v. Farhane, 2255 reply in support of 2255 (Oct. 19, 2019)

U.S. v. Farhane, Decision denying motion to vacate (Mar. 31, 2020)

Farhane v. U.S., Request for certificate of appealability (Jun. 19, 2020)

Farhane v. U.S., Gov’t opposition to certificate of appealability (Jun. 29, 2020)

Farhane v. U.S., Reply in support of request for certificate of appealability (July 6, 2020)

Farhane v.U.S., Opening brief (Jan. 26, 2021)

Farhane v. U.S., Gov’t opposition brief (Apr. 27, 2021)

Farhane v. U.S., Reply brief (May 18, 2021)

Farhane v. U.S., Opinion (Aug. 11, 2023)