Speech #1020067160

U.S. District Court for the Central District of California. testified before the Subcommittee on International Law. Immigration. and Refugees. which I have the honor to chair. Speaking on behalf of the Judicial Conference of the United States. Judge Parker said. The 1990 legislation was enacted to streamline the naturalization process by reducing duplicative paperwork and overlapping administrative responsibilities borne both by the federal courts and the Immigration and Naturalization Service. The Judiciary does not oppose these efforts. but rather. applauds the accomplishments of the legislature in streamlining the procedure for naturalization. The judiciary. however. has serious concerns with that portion of the Act which potentially would remove the courts from the administration of the oathtaking ceremony. The Act provides that applicants for naturalization can choose to have any United States district court. the Attorney General. or any state court meeting certain requirements administer the oath of allegiance. The oathtaking ceremony traditionally has been imbued with a special significance directly attributable to the participation of a judicial officer. Our judges are proud of the special role they play in administering the oath of allegiance to new citizens. and as a body. we do oppose that aspect of the new law which would largely remove the courts from the oathtaking ceremonies. Judge Lew and I are here today to discuss with you the importance of the courts role in administering the oath of allegiance and to advocate preserving the role of the judiciary in the oathtaking ceremony to the fullest extent practicable. while achieving the goal of the new law of conducting the ceremony in a timely fashion. Under my bill no delay will occur between the oathtaking ceremony and the award to the newly sworn citizen of the certificate of naturalization. Such delays are possible under the 1990 act which authorizes the Immigration