Anderson

Anderson v. Holder

Bad Law
673 F.3d 1089·2012 WL 762980
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 12, 201207-74042, 08-73946, 10-16491California7,530 words

Opinion

Opinion

Reinhardt, J.

This case requires us to apply a 1952 statute to circumstances far removed from those that the enacting Congress imagined. Gary Anderson, born in England to an American serviceman father and an English mother, is a citizen of the United States if and only if his “paternity ... [was] established while [he was] under the age of twenty-one years by legitimation.” 8 U.S.C. § 1409 (a) (1952) (“Former § 1409(a)”). When Congress enacted this law, it believed that “[a]s a general proposition, legitimation is accomplished by the marriage of the parents with acknowledgment of paternity by the putative father.” S.Rep. No. 81-1515, at 692-93 (1950). The law of Arizona — one of the states in which Anderson resided before the age of twenty-one — lacked any such requirement, however. Instead, it provided that “[e]very child is ... the legitimate child of its natural parents.” 1975 Ariz. Sess. Laws ch. 117, § 2 (codified at Ariz.Rev.Stat. § 8-601). The question we face is how to reconcile the language of Former § 1409(a) with a state statutory scheme in which it makes little sense.

Although Anderson’s biological father had no contact with him for more than four decades after his birth,…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.