>From S.T. v. Napolitano, 2012 WL 6048222 (S.D. Tex. Dec. 5):
S.T. is a citizen of India. He is currently eleven years old. Bakula and Ashok
Trivedi are both natives of India. Ashok became a United States citizen in
1997; Bakula became a citizen in 1995.
Bakula and Ashok Trivedi practice the Swaminarayan religion. They believe they
are required to follow their swami's religious instruction fully and
completely. About a year before S.T.'s birth in 2001, their swami told them
they would soon have a child who was a gift from a divine source. The swami
instructed them that the child must never be subjected to medical testing. They
assert that they have complied with this instruction.
In September 2001, S.T.'s parents arrived with S.T. at the U.S. Consulate in
Mumbai, India. They asserted that they were S.T.'s biological parents and
applied on his behalf for a Consular Report of a Birth Abroad of a Citizen of
the United States of America ("CRBA"), a passport, and a social security card.
The applications were denied. The denial documents stated that the Trivedis
failed to provide evidence of a blood relationship to S.T. but that the
Trivedis could submit DNA test results for S.T. to provide the evidence. A
consular official with whom the Trivedis met indicated that the applications
would not be granted without the DNA test results. S.T.'s application for a
social security card was denied in February 2010.
In February 2010, S.T. entered the United States under a humanitarian-parole
grant. In April 2010, S.T. again filed a passport application and an N-600. The
State Department and the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services
("USCIS") again asked for DNA testing to establish the biological relationship
between S.T. and the Trivedis. No DNA testing was performed. The passport
application was denied in December 2010 and the N-600 was denied in September
2011.
On June 28, 2011, S.T. filed a new passport application. In October, 2011, S.T.
filed an appeal from the denial of his N-600 with the USCIS Administrative
Appeals Office. During this appeal process, S.T. claimed a religious objection
to DNA testing, stating, "Even if [S.T.'s] birth certificate is not accepted as
evidence by USCIS for a claimed biological relationship, [S.T.'s] religious
beliefs forbid the use of scientific testing."
The court dismissed the Free Exercise Clause claim, but the RFRA claim remains
to be litigated. (On a nonlegal note, if I were the husband, I'd be a bit
suspicious about the swami's instructions, but maybe I just have a dirty mind.)
Eugene
_______________________________________________
To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see
http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw
Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private.
Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can
read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the
messages to others.
