cobra versus attorney general entered the united states decades ago when they were young children and by all means have lived the entire get their lives under the assumption that they were united states citizens and still go one day thirty forty fifty years later after they've come into the country citizen and the reason he's not a us citizen is because he is the adopted child of a us citizen parent a native born us citizen if it's the government we have that distinguishes between different categories of people in here he's adopted and there is a justification for that and they've given three justifications for the different treatment of adopted children namely to prevent immigration fraud to promote a real relationship between the parent the child and lastly protecting the rights of every and parents which seems to be pretty strong what what do you have to show in order admits that it's the adoption in a self that makes it sufficient to create real relationship in other words your honour's it's that adoption is sufficient to create relationships and through other other legal action of illegal issues in terms of tax obligations government benefits child tax credits and other abilities to choose you know the parents ability to choose medical providers and schools to more than about the child to go to but you don't know if the motivation of the adoption is something other than a real relationship so it doesn't make sense for the government to have an interest in knowing that there is this relationship and there's not for instance immigration fraud or something like that i would submit your been fulfilled so by looking at that statute itself it quite essentially says hey you can apply for a certificate of citizenship but as an adopted child only subsection eight would apply to you so therefore you don't have to tell yourself to state subsection b which requires the oath which requires that the the other the other process of becoming naturalized here in terms of  and they issue them based on documents that we submit how does that help you though that sounds like you're highlighting how easy it is to accomplish the conditions proceed to your client getting the relief  the adoption itself we would see in a lawful adoption would would be sufficient to prove that the individual is derives citizenship but is quite citizenship through the about the parents so it's not rational to ask the s government doesn't have an interest in not accepting at face value all foreign adoptions wherever they occur and then that would apply your honor to to any any  circumstance let's say what is it that say that somebody wants to adopt some the dominican republic and bring it back to the united states using that adoption they can secure federal government benefits they could secure it's you know be good to get the child to school and that gives that's in the second circuit so that's not binding on the score may be persuasive precedent however the smart case deals with a completely different statute that of a naturalized u s citizen parent and this deals with a my logical individual that child becomes a u s citizen by virtue of the naturalization of that parent not the naturalization of the child there's a distinction between smart and the facts of this case smart deals with the is can establish those conditions at any time they could be sixty seventy eighty years old and if they can prove that those conditions were met there they can establish those conditions at any time and secured the river citizenship unlike the person this matter at the age of eighteen it stops he could not do anything more at that point to acquire that that that that is theirs and shipped through the adopted heritage if you were to read this not you as it unfortunately on point in terms of our factual circumstances here it's similar in terms of this national circumstance and we would submit your honor that the ninth circuit's decision though however did not did not meet the   in terms of not acknowledging that the adoption itself would have been sufficient to establish prevent immigration fraud and have to respect that i'm i believe in the context of the adoption issue i the what is required in terms of securing a wall for adoption is a lot more of an securing a marriage licen please the court my name is stephanie back and i'm here today on behalf of the u s attorney general and this court should deny this petition for video because cannot negate every conceivable justification for congress's decision not to automatically co children instead congress recently required a u s citizen adoptive parent to apply for a certificate of citizenship for the adopted child to a team to obtain a certificate of citizenship so in acquirements had seen that for example the child had to be physically present in the united states pursuant to a lawful admission under the age of eighteen and in the legal custody of the citizen parent and adopted by the age of sixteen proscar could have that those requirements if his adoptive father had a piper certificate on his down to that or not really i don't believe so i think that his his argument is that the entire application process writ large is unconstitutional that it should be automatic that the adoptive parents adoption creates u s citizenship which is do we just look at the dates that are relevant here or do we also need to look at the  constitutionality he doesn't asserts that he could meet the requirements of the statutes today or that it should be applied to him today it is that he should have already automatically acquired u s citizenship so  it is a threshold matter of perhaps whether he could needs it it is not required for this court to ask whether he could meet the requirements  has has recognized as an important trust to protect the rights of alien parents the argument that that we're putting forward here is that it's related to the first two arguments that the adoption could not really look like a u s adoption if it's if it happens in a foreign country we have no assurance that the rights of the alien parents have been terminated through the adoption process and the  requirement first step to citizenship could help advance the interests of protecting alien parents by giving the attorney general the opportunity to review the adoption make sure it really does fall within kind of u s standards and also the certificate of citizenships requirements that the child be in the legal custody of the u s citizen parents would help resolve the concern that well maybe this this for for example foreign adoption wouldn't really puts the u s citizen parents in the same stead as is typical in domestic adoption now as this court noted the dent decision and conceded the dentist surgeon out of the ninth circuit is directly contrary to his position the smart decision it does deal with a different statutory scheme but it does uphold treating about dotted and biological children differently in the naturalization context and it's based on the first two interests that one of the things a lot sure this sort of necessarily follows is that you say that automatic citizenship for adopted children is different because there's no quote guarantee of a real relationship right going in sadly what's the guarantee of a real relationship between a biological parent a child while at least we doe in the biological contacts that there is some relationship even if it is simply a blood tie in the adoption context you just have this piece of paper there's a pretty strong statement though right if you're an adoptive parent i mean it's a pretty strong statement that you're seeking to be involved with the child and raise the child  blood time doesn't necessarily make that same choice the well again that this interest is kind of tied to the idea of immigration fraud again ok so that's that's what i was getting at so really the the underlying rationale here is is the government is saying look we're going to trust biological time is more than we're going to it's really a matter of degree not a better kind we're not going to  trust a piece of paper that says sol was adopted because that might be easier to defraud the government is that where we are well in the biological context it's impossible to commit fraud if you establish that there is that biological connection and how you do that through a birth certificate  believe that there are processes i don't have that that information to that it's the birth certificate what i'm wondering is you know could fraudulent birth certificates be is readily available as fraudulent adopt but it's not just about arafat's own adoption papers it's also the battery of someone could legitimately go and dots someone thinking well that's better for that person just because they can get these immigration benefits potentially now but they could if they filed the form right even if we assume here that this was a i don't see anything in the record to support this at all but if we assume that this w have to be proven to the satisfaction of the attorney general and so the herrera would have needed to prove that the adoption wasn't praja once that the adoption actually occurred and also the other factors such as actually being in the legal custody of the u s system parents and so those steps would have given the attorney general the opportunity to detect some immigration fraud and also just the fact that you have to file a piece of paper making representations to the u s government could deter some people some u s citizens from committing this kind of immigration my in terms of the government's treatment of an adopted child this kind of is quite honestly  a biological parent and a biological child that's true with men and women to as parents and as supreme court recently said that was a rational distinction right to treat women mothers and fathers differently i  believe if i'm not mistaking if i'm not mistaken that was a two recent case and they found that there was an equal protection issue however the court there said they couldn't necessarily and to have it  apply prospectively don't that case yes