Official Website of the United States Department of Homeland Security
UpFirstPrevious [ Chapter 2 of 5] NextLast

Chapter 2: Marriage and Marital Union for Naturalization


A. Validity of Marriage


1. Validity of Marriages in the United States or Abroad


Validity of Marriage for Immigration Purposes


The applicant must establish validity of his or her marriage. In general, the legal validity of a marriage is determined by the law of the place where the marriage was celebrated (“place-of-celebration rule”). Under this rule, a marriage is valid for immigration purposes in cases where the marriage is valid under the law of the jurisdiction in which it is performed.[1] See, for example, Matter of Lovo-Lara, 23 I&N Dec. 746 (BIA 2005); Matter of Da Silva, 15 I&N Dec. 778 (BIA 1976); Matter of H-, 9 I&N Dec 640 (BIA 1962).


In all cases, the burden is on the applicant to establish that he or she has a valid marriage with his or her U.S. citizen spouse for the required period of time.[2] See 8 CFR 319.1(b)(1).  In most cases, a marriage certificate is prima facie evidence that the marriage was properly and legally performed.


USCIS does not recognize the following relationships as marriages, even if valid in the place of celebration:



Validity of Marriage Between Two Persons of the Same Sex


In June 2013, the Supreme Court held that section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which had limited the terms “marriage” and “spouse” to opposite-sex marriages for purposes of all federal laws, was unconstitutional.[8] See United States v. Windsor, 133 S. Ct. 2675 (2013). See 1 U.S.C. 7 (section 3 of DOMA). See the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), Pub. L. 104-199, 110 Stat. 2419 (Sept. 21, 1996). In accordance with the Supreme Court decision, USCIS determines the validity of a same-sex marriage by the place-of-celebration rule, just as USCIS applies this rule to determine the validity of an opposite-sex marriage.[9] Prior to the Supreme Court decision, United States v. Windsor, USCIS did not recognize relationships between two persons of the same sex as marriages or intended marriages in accordance with section 3 of DOMA. 


Therefore, in cases of marriage between persons of the same sex, officers will review the laws of the jurisdiction in which the marriage took place to determine if the jurisdiction recognizes same-sex marriages and the marriage otherwise is legally valid.


Since the place-of-celebration rule governs same-sex marriages in exactly the same way that it governs opposite-sex marriages, unless the marriage is polygamous or otherwise falls within an exception to the place-of-celebration rule as discussed above, the legal validity of a same-sex marriage is determined exclusively by the law of the jurisdiction where the marriage was celebrated.


If the same-sex couple now resides in a jurisdiction different from the one in which they celebrated their marriage, and that jurisdiction does not recognize same-sex marriages, the officer will look to the law of the state where the marriage was celebrated in order to determine the validity of the marriage. The domicile state’s laws and policies on same-sex marriages will not affect whether USCIS will recognize a marriage as valid.


Validity of Marriage in Cases Involving Transgender Persons


USCIS accepts the validity of a marriage in cases involving transgender persons if the state or local jurisdiction in which the marriage took place recognizes the marriage as a valid marriage, subject to the exceptions described above (such as polygamy).[10] Officers should consult OCC in cases where the marriage was originally an opposite-sex marriage celebrated in a state that does not recognize same-sex marriage, and one of the spouses changed gender after the marriage. 


2. Validity of Foreign Divorces and Subsequent Remarriages 


The validity of a divorce abroad depends on the interpretation of the divorce laws of the foreign country that granted the divorce and the reciprocity laws in the state of the United States where the applicant remarried.[11] See Matter of Luna, 18 I&N Dec. 385 (BIA 1983). See Matter of Ma, 15 I&N Dec. 70 (BIA 1974). If the divorce is not final under the foreign law, remarriage to a U.S. citizen is not valid for immigration purposes.[12] See Matter of Ma, 15 I&N Dec. 70, 71 (BIA 1974). See Matter of Miraldo, 14 I&N Dec. 704 (BIA 1974). 


An officer should ensure that the court issuing the divorce had jurisdiction to do so.[13] For example, law requires both parties to be domiciled in the country at the time of divorce, but that was not the case. See Matter of Hosseinian, 19 I& N Dec. 453 (BIA 1987). See Matter of Weaver, 16 I&N Dec. 730 (BIA 1979). See Matter of Luna, 18 I&N Dec. 385 (BIA 1983).  Foreign divorce laws may allow for a final decree even when the applicants are not residing in the country. Some states, however, do not recognize these foreign divorces and do not provide reciprocity. The applicant and his or her former spouse’s place of domicile at the time of the divorce is important in determining whether the court had jurisdiction.


3. Evidence


The burden is on the applicant to establish that he or she is in a valid marriage with his or her U.S. citizen spouse for the required period of time.[14] See 8 CFR 319.1(b)(1). A spouse of a U.S. citizen must submit with the naturalization application an official civil record to establish that the marriage is legal and valid. If an official civil record cannot be produced, secondary evidence may be accepted on a case-by-case basis. An officer has the right to request an original record if there is doubt as to the authenticity of the record.[15] See 8 CFR 103.2(b). See 8 CFR 319.1 and 8 CFR 319.2. 


B. Common Law Marriage


The concept of common law marriage presupposes an honest good-faith intention on the part of two persons, free to marry, to live together as husband and wife from the inception of the relationship. Some states recognize common law marriages and consider the parties to be married.[16] For purposes of determining whether a common law marriage exists, see statutes and case law for the appropriate jurisdiction.  In order for a common law marriage to be valid for immigration purposes:


  • The parties must live in that jurisdiction; and

  • The parties must meet the qualifications for common law marriage for that jurisdiction.


Other states may recognize a common law marriage contracted in another state even if the recognizing state does not accept common law marriage as a means for its own residents to contract marriage.


USCIS recognizes common law marriages for purposes of naturalization if the marriage was valid and recognized by the state in which the marriage was established.[17] The date a common law marriage commences is determined by laws of the relevant jurisdiction. This applies even if the naturalization application is filed in a jurisdiction that does not recognize or has never recognized the principle of common law marriage.


The officer should review the laws of the relevant jurisdiction on common law marriages to determine whether the applicant and spouse should be considered to be married for purposes of naturalization and when the marriage commenced.


C. U.S. Citizenship from Time of Filing until Oath


In order to take advantage of the special naturalization provisions for spouses of U.S. citizens, the applicant’s spouse must be and remain a U.S. citizen from the time of filing until the time the applicant takes the Oath of Allegiance. An applicant is ineligible for naturalization under these provisions if his or her spouse is not a U.S. citizen or loses U.S. citizenship status by denaturalization or expatriation prior to the applicant taking the Oath of Allegiance.[18] See 8 CFR 319.1(b)(2)(i) and 8 CFR 319.2(c). 


D. Marital Union and Living in Marital Union


1. Married and Living in Marital Union


In general, all naturalization applicants filing on the basis of marriage to a U.S. citizen must be the spouse of a U.S. citizen from the time of filing the Application for Naturalization until the applicant takes the Oath of Allegiance. In addition, some spousal naturalization provisions require that the applicant “live in marital union” with his or her citizen spouse prior to filing the Application for Naturalization.[19] See INA 319(a). See 8 CFR 319.1(a)(3) and 8 CFR 319.1(b). USCIS considers an applicant to “live in marital union” with his or her citizen spouse if the applicant and the citizen actually reside together.


An applicant under the special provisions for spouses is ineligible for naturalization if:


  • The applicant is not residing with his or her United States citizen spouse at the time of filing or during the time in which the applicant is required to be living in marital union with the citizen spouse; or


  • If at any time prior to taking the Oath of Allegiance, the spousal relationship is terminated or altered to such an extent that neither the applicant nor the United States citizen spouse can be considered to be residing together as husband and wife.


There are limited circumstances where an applicant may be able to establish that he or she is living in marital union with his or her citizen spouse even though the applicant does not actually reside with the citizen spouse.[20] See guidance below on “Involuntary Separation” under the paragraph “Failure to be Living in Loss of Marital Union due to Separation.”


In all cases where it is applicable, the burden is on the applicant to establish that he or she has lived in marital union with his or her U.S. citizen spouse for the required period of time.[21] See 8 CFR 319.1(b)(1).


2. Loss of Marital Union due to Death, Divorce, or Expatriation


Death of U.S. Citizen Spouse


An applicant is ineligible to naturalize as the spouse of a U.S. citizen if the U.S. citizen dies any time prior to the applicant taking the Oath of Allegiance.[22] See 8 CFR 319.1(b)(2)(i). See 8 CFR 319.2(c). However, if the applicant is the surviving spouse of a U.S. citizen who died during a period of honorable service in an active-duty status in the U.S. armed forces, the applicant may be eligible for naturalization based on his or her marriage under a special provision.[23] See INA 319(d). See Part I, Military Members and their Families, Chapter 9, Spouses, Children, and Surviving Family Benefits, Section D, Naturalization for Surviving Spouse, Child, or Parent of Service Member (INA 319(d)) [12 USCIS-PM I.9(D)]. 


Divorce or Annulment


A person’s marital status may be terminated by a judicial divorce or by an annulment. A divorce or annulment breaks the marital relationship. The applicant is no longer the spouse of a U.S. citizen if the marriage is terminated by a divorce or annulment. Accordingly, such an applicant is ineligible to naturalize as the spouse of a U.S. citizen if the divorce or annulment occurs before or after the naturalization application is filed.[24] See 8 CFR 319.1(b)(2)(i) and 8 CFR 319.2(c). 


The result of annulment is to declare a marriage null and void from its inception. An annulment is usually retroactive, meaning that the marriage is considered to be invalid from the beginning. A court's jurisdiction to grant an annulment is set forth in the various divorce statutes and generally requires residence or domicile of the parties in that jurisdiction. When a marriage has been annulled, it is documented by a court order or decree. 


In contrast, the effect of a judicial divorce is to terminate the status as of the date on which the court entered the final decree of divorce. When a marriage is terminated by divorce, the termination is entered by the court with jurisdiction and is documented by a copy of the final divorce decree. USCIS determines the validity of a divorce by examining whether the state or country which granted the divorce properly assumed jurisdiction over the divorce proceeding.[25] See Matter of Hussein, 15 I&N Dec. 736 (BIA 1976).  USCIS also determines whether the parties followed the proper legal formalities required by the state or country in which the divorce was obtained to determine if the divorce is legally binding.[26] See Matter of Luna, 18 I&N Dec. 385 (BIA 1983). In all cases, the divorce must be final.


An applicant’s ineligibility for naturalization as the spouse of a U.S. citizen due to the death of the citizen spouse or to divorce is not cured by the subsequent marriage to another U.S. citizen. 


Expatriation of U.S. Citizen Spouse


An applicant is ineligible to naturalize as the spouse of a U.S. citizen if the U.S. citizen has expatriated any time prior to the applicant taking the Oath of Allegiance for naturalization.[27] See 8 CFR 319.1(b)(2)(i). See 8 CFR 319.2(c). See INA 337.


3. Failure to be Living in Marital Union due to Separation


Legal Separation


A legal separation is a formal process by which the rights of a married couple are altered by a judicial decree but without eliminating the marital relationship.[28] See for example, Nehme v. INS, 252 F.3d 415, 422-27 (5th Cir. 2001) (Discussing legal separation for purposes of derivation of citizenship). In most cases, after a legal separation, the applicant will no longer be actually residing with his or her U.S. citizen spouse, and therefore will not be living in marital union with the U.S. citizen spouse.


However, if the applicant and the U.S. citizen spouse continue to reside in the same household, the marital relationship has been altered to such an extent by the legal separation that they will not be considered to be living together in marital union.


Accordingly, an applicant is not living in marital union with a U.S. citizen spouse during any period of time in which the spouses are legally separated.[29] See 8 CFR 319.1(b)(2)(ii)(A). An applicant who is legally separated from his or her spouse during the time period in which he or she must be living in marital union is ineligible to naturalize as the spouse of a U.S. citizen. 


Informal Separation 


In many instances, spouses will separate without obtaining a judicial order altering the marital relationship or formalizing the separation. An applicant who is no longer actually residing with his or her U.S. citizen spouse following an informal separation is not living in marital union with the U.S. citizen spouse.


However, if the U.S. citizen spouse and the applicant continue to reside in the same household, an officer must determine on a case-by-case basis whether an informal separation before the filing of the naturalization application renders an applicant ineligible for naturalization as the spouse of a U.S. citizen.[30] See 8 CFR 319.1(b)(2)(ii)(B). Under these circumstances, an applicant is not living in marital union with a U.S. citizen spouse during any period of time in which the spouses are informally separated if such separation suggests the possibility of marital disunity.


Factors to consider in making this determination may include:


  • The length of separation;


  • Whether the applicant and his or her spouse continue to support each other and their children (if any) during the separation;


  • Whether the spouses intend to separate permanently; and



Involuntary Separation


Under very limited circumstances and where there is no indication of marital disunity, an applicant may be able to establish that he or she is living in marital union with his or her U.S. citizen spouse even though the applicant does not actually reside with citizen spouse. An applicant is not made ineligible for naturalization for not living in marital union if the separation is due to circumstances beyond his or her control, such as:[32] See 8 CFR 319.1(b)(2)(ii)(C).


  • Service in the U.S. armed forces; or

  • Required travel or relocation for employment.


USCIS does not consider incarceration during the time of required living in marital union to be an involuntary separation.





Footnotes


1. [^] 

 See, for example, Matter of Lovo-Lara, 23 I&N Dec. 746 (BIA 2005); Matter of Da Silva, 15 I&N Dec. 778 (BIA 1976); Matter of H-, 9 I&N Dec 640 (BIA 1962).

2. [^] 

 See 8 CFR 319.1(b)(1). 

3. [^] 

 See Matter of H-, 9 I&N Dec. 640 (BIA 1962). Polygamous marriages are not recognized as a matter of federal public policy. However, note that battered spouses who had a bigamous marriage may still be eligible for naturalization. See INA 204(a)(1)(A)(iii)(II) and INA 319(a).

4. [^] 

 This is a narrow exception that under BIA case law generally has been limited to situations, such as certain incestuous marriages, where the marriage violates the criminal law of the state of residence. See Matter of Da Silva, 15 I&N Dec 778 (BIA 1976); Matter of Zappia, 12 I&N Dec. 439 (BIA 1967); Matter of Hirabayashi, 10 I&N Dec 722 (BIA 1964); Matter of M, 3 I&N Dec. 465 (BIA 1948). Note that as discussed below, if the state of residence has a public policy refusing to recognize same-sex marriage, this will not result in a same-sex marriage being considered invalid for immigration purposes if it is valid in the place of celebration. 

5. [^] 

 If the relationship is treated as a marriage, however, such as a “common law marriage,” it will be recognized.

6. [^] 

 See INA 101(a)(35).

7. [^] 

 See Matter of Laureano, 19 I&N Dec. 1 (BIA 1983); Matter of Phillis, 15 I&N Dec. 385 (BIA 1975; Matter of M-, 8 I&N Dec. 217 (BIA 1958).

8. [^] 

 See United States v. Windsor, 133 S. Ct. 2675 (2013). See 1 U.S.C. 7 (section 3 of DOMA). See the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), Pub. L. 104-199, 110 Stat. 2419 (Sept. 21, 1996).

9. [^] 

 Prior to the Supreme Court decision, United States v. Windsor, USCIS did not recognize relationships between two persons of the same sex as marriages or intended marriages in accordance with section 3 of DOMA.

10. [^] 

 Officers should consult OCC in cases where the marriage was originally an opposite-sex marriage celebrated in a state that does not recognize same-sex marriage, and one of the spouses changed gender after the marriage. 

11. [^] 

 See Matter of Luna, 18 I&N Dec. 385 (BIA 1983). See Matter of Ma, 15 I&N Dec. 70 (BIA 1974).

12. [^] 

 See Matter of Ma, 15 I&N Dec. 70, 71 (BIA 1974). See Matter of Miraldo, 14 I&N Dec. 704 (BIA 1974).

13. [^] 

 For example, law requires both parties to be domiciled in the country at the time of divorce, but that was not the case. See Matter of Hosseinian, 19 I& N Dec. 453 (BIA 1987). See Matter of Weaver, 16 I&N Dec. 730 (BIA 1979). See Matter of Luna, 18 I&N Dec. 385 (BIA 1983). 

14. [^] 

 See 8 CFR 319.1(b)(1).

15. [^] 

 See 8 CFR 103.2(b). See 8 CFR 319.1 and 8 CFR 319.2

16. [^] 

 For purposes of determining whether a common law marriage exists, see statutes and case law for the appropriate jurisdiction. 

17. [^] 

 The date a common law marriage commences is determined by laws of the relevant jurisdiction.

19. [^] 

 See INA 319(a). See 8 CFR 319.1(a)(3) and 8 CFR 319.1(b).

20. [^] 

 See guidance below on “Involuntary Separation” under the paragraph “Failure to be Living in Loss of Marital Union due to Separation.”

21. [^] 

 See 8 CFR 319.1(b)(1).

23. [^] 

 See INA 319(d). See Part I, Military Members and their FamiliesChapter 9, Spouses, Children, and Surviving Family BenefitsSection D, Naturalization for Surviving Spouse, Child, or Parent of Service Member (INA 319(d)) [12 USCIS-PM I.9(D)].

25. [^] 

 See Matter of Hussein, 15 I&N Dec. 736 (BIA 1976). 

26. [^] 

 See Matter of Luna, 18 I&N Dec. 385 (BIA 1983).

27. [^] 

 See 8 CFR 319.1(b)(2)(i). See 8 CFR 319.2(c). See INA 337.

28. [^] 

 See for example, Nehme v. INS, 252 F.3d 415, 422-27 (5th Cir. 2001) (Discussing legal separation for purposes of derivation of citizenship).

31. [^] 

 See U.S. v. Moses, 94 F. 3d 182 (5th Cir. 1996). 



Resources


Legal Authorities
INA 319, 8 CFR 319 - Spouses of U.S. citizens


Updates


Date Details
July 1, 2014
Technical Update

Validity of Same-Sex Marriages

​This technical update addresses the Supreme Court ruling holding that Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) is unconstitutional.

January 7, 2013
POLICY ALERT

Comprehensive Citizenship and Naturalization Policy Guidance

​USCIS is issuing updated and comprehensive citizenship and naturalization policy guidance in the new USCIS Policy Manual.

Read more »


Current as of July 1, 2014