Originally Posted by
GUWonder
Yes, but what is willful misrepresentation/concealment of a requested material fact isn't necessarily judged as being the same for everyone by everyone -- it varies based on the eyes of the beholders.
The Supreme Court of the United States set forth a clear test of what constitutes willful and false misrepresentation or concealment.
Before the court was the specific issue of whether certain misrepresentations or concealments made by Kungys in connection with his naturalization proceeding were material within the meaning of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952. Specifically, whether false statements with concerning date and place of birth, wartime occupations, and wartime residence were material within the meaning of the statute.
The court held that the test of whether concealments or misrepresentations were material is whether they had a natural tendency to influence the decisions of the Immigration and Naturalization Service.
The court then determined that the misrepresentation of the date and place of his birth in the naturalization petition was not material, since those facts by themselves were not relevant to the petitioner's qualifications for citizenship.
The case was then remanded to determine whether the other misrepresentations constituted "false testimony for the purpose of obtaining" immigration or naturalization benefits.
If you can cite a United States Supreme Court case defining material misrepresentations or concealments differently for the purpose of revoking one's citizenship, I'll be more than happy to read it.