is whether it violated the spirit but why isn't this just a straightforward question of statutory interpretation i mean as you say your brief i mean if the statute says the statu  months of this rule if you're a u s national and you wish to renounce and thereby relinquish your u s nationality you may do so without ever leaving the united states and without ever stepping foot on foreign soil so what th on to a six that directly contravenes the structure of the commerce of doctors the letter saying that no if you're u s national you may not leave this country and you may not renounce your you may not notice your nationality and thereby relinquish  nationality unless you leave this country and show governments and demonstrate a present biscoe ability for doing so so that the letter has imposed a condition on to a six that is precisely what congress exempted a six from so in that was understand and i thought that's what i think that's how we at the time with how we should frame the issue i think the letter went beyond that and said that one may formulate an intent to relinquish us nationally only if one also demonstrates a presence physical ability to depart this country and enter another country and that's where the letter went to for we accept position that to intend to do something one must fully understand the consequences of that act so to intend to rule relinquish us nationality one must fully understand that one is relinquishing their right to us residency but mr kaufman has repeatedly and unequivocally sworn that he understands he what happens then is that he loses a bundle of rights and privileges associated with being a us national he will have difficulty maintaining a job he will lose his right to vote he will lose his right to hold elected only to be detained he may be detained it's unclear under the why would he be detained because he would have no lawful immigration or residency status in their states but he in his mind values losing his find him he's going to be excluded then he's he will end up outside the country why would the agency require he have a plan to leave the country if the government is going to send him out of the country anyway the government has indicated that it won't send him out of the country the government has indicated that he has no means of leaving there's no place to send emotion you said i thought you said in response to this that he could be  to domestically renounce his u s nationality without ever having to leave without ever having to gain access to another country and the lesson from this court decision in schnitzler is that if wanted to create an expatriate pathway whereby japanese americans could easily domestically renounce and thereby relinquish their u s nationality but you're right your honor the motives of these members of congress were sinister and this is a dar time in our nation's history these members of congress wanted these japanese americans to relinquish their u s nationalities so that the u s government could then mistreat them and even detain them but there's another strand of legislative history where by certain members of congress wanted to write a general appears not to be saying during times of war when emotions are running high if you don't appreciate your u s citizenship and you want to discard it you may do so in fact the government will accommodate you will provide you an efficient and easy way to do so let you relinquish your nationality or the state of war problem has to be triggered on him and the state of war crime has been triggered on for the purposes of this application if the state of war prong were triggered off then this pathway would be is that he suspicion is whether or not we he he admits that he has not he does not have a police i think he does he has a plan to leave the country the question is whether united states that's physical presence physical presence isn't the same as right or presidency you know your honor he's a holder who did a he's physically present in the united states but she's not exercising a right of residency political question is as to international relations as well as the congress's ability to manage the uniform code of naturalization and de naturalization or united states that is a just as well as what the department of homeland security is facing here we have a united states citizen who would be right outside within the united states and there is a policy interest in not creating a population of post that is that stateless and girls who remain in the united states  administratively nightmare where this individual is now stateless he has no connections or ties or cruel to enter any other country and in the case of this particular applicant has a lengthy sexual abuse criminal history which would really why are many countries not to allow him  states that he would be granted rena's the is the law if he can meet the statutory requirements and one of those environments is that he actually intend to relinquish all of his rights including the right to reside in the united states and that's consistent with with hypothetically let's imagine that that that he had contacted every single nationality throughout the world every single one asking to move there and they had all denied him the ability to  come and he had all the evidence to show that he had tried to get to what would you do in that case i recognize that's not this case but help me understand what the law means from the government's perspective of course your honor that those are not the facts present the intention of relinquishing u s nationality and and he's tried everything he can to leave the country he's tried to get out of the united states and yet the government's position is he has not shown any intention of relinquishing us nationality years you know we will let him go is our honor the question about whether he has any he has no means to leave the united states is not really the issue here at the time he made his requests he was under an order said that the touchstone of that analysis is the citizens will and those cases have erected an intemperate parliament that would effectively protect the citizens free choice about whether to retain or relinquish u s nationality