I don’t know yet if the immigration notice is a mistake or a shift in USCIS policy, but scheduling an interview for a Certificate of Citizenship case is confusing, wasteful, and a potentially troubling development.
My immigration practice is exclusively limited to intercountry adopted people. I receive interview notices for their cases, but only for cases where my clients seek to naturalize. Interviews for a naturalization case (known as an N-400) are required and expected.
For applications for a Certificate of Citizenship (known as an “N-600”) my clients are adults, and they are already US citizens through their adoptive parents. We are simply applying for documentary proof of that citizenship. Interviews for an N-600 are unusual, especially for adult intercountry adoptees who secured citizenship “automatically” through their adoptive parents decades ago. While US immigration law has long required interviews for many applications, they have for many years waived interviews specifically for Certificates of Citizenship, especially if the documents are in order and/or if the client has provided a copy of a valid US passport.
Even if documents are missing, the USCIS officer reviewing the case typically requests the missing documents by sending a letter known formally as a “Request for Evidence” (RFE). RFE’s are an efficient and practical way to provide evidence that may not have made it into the file or that the officer cannot find among the documents already submitted. You get the letter, review what’s needed, and send in what’s allegedly missing. No need for a formal interview, no need for extraneous travel and expense.
Officers, however, rarely schedule interviews for N-600 applications, and for good reason—the case is ready for a decision, and an interview is unnecessary. In fact, of the 100 or more N-600 cases that I have filed on behalf of clients in the past, zero have required an interview. It’s unheard of—and it’s potentially a massive waste of time, money, and resources.
My client in this specific case submitted all of the required documents, including a ten-year valid and unexpired US passport. Why the USCIS field office needs to interview my client is yet unknown, though we are trying to determine those reasons. Three possibilities for requesting an interview for an N-600 come to mind:
- It’s a mistake. Hey, mistakes happen, and a notice is sent that should not have been sent. With a massive overload of cases, USCIS makes mistakes frequently. Maybe they don’t realize this is an intercountry adoptee case—or maybe they sent an interview notice instead of a Request for Evidence. Hard to believe given the differences in the scope of the notices, but a mistake is possible.
- It’s a new local policy. Across the country, local field offices are instituting policies that appear to be unique to that office or region, some of them very troubling. I’m not sure if this is to try things out or if “testing” a new process represents a possible later expansion of a broader agenda, but some offices treat various applications differently than others. But this specific office for my client? I don’t know yet, but I hope it’s not a new local tentacle that winds its way up into a national policy and begins to require interviews for all N-600 cases.
- It’s a new national policy. It’s doubtful this is new national policy. USCIS has not announced any new policies for interviews that are specific to N-600 applications, though it is requiring interviews in many cases where they were typically waived in the past. That said, I’m fearful this will become a national policy, which will only make what is a fairly routine application—the N-600– into one that takes far more resources and time to complete, including a so far undefined need to interview an applicant who has provided all of the evidence of citizenship, including in many cases a US passport. If the goal of the administration is make US citizenship harder to obtain—and it is clear that this is a specific goal of the Trump administration—then making it harder to obtain proof of that citizenship may end up being a side effect of such misguided and wasteful policies. I hope not.
I will update this issue once I learn more. In the meantime, if you want to help, please consider donating to the pro bono Citizenship Clinic for intercountry adoptees. I am the attorney for that clinic, which is overseen by Adoptees United. Donations can be made here or by clicking on the button below.
Update | November 25, 2025: I have been asked a few times about whether this matter involves any criminal background for my client. It does not. A persons’ criminal background is irrelevant to an N-600 Application for Certificate of Citizenship, for the simple reason that the person is already a US citizen.
Leave a Reply