Court Opinion

ID: 9379851
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-03-16 17:00:55.472203+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:17:17.534893
License: Public Domain

USCA11 Case: 21-12369     Document: 55-1       Date Filed: 03/16/2023   Page: 1 of 5

                                                     [DO NOT PUBLISH]
                                      In the
                United States Court of Appeals
                          For the Eleventh Circuit

                           ____________________

                                    No. 21-12369
                            Non-Argument Calendar
                           ____________________

       EMILE PARKER,
       a.k.a. Andein Jean-Pierre,
                                                                Petitioner,
       versus
       U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL,

                                                               Respondent.

                           ____________________

                    Petition for Review of a Decision of the
                         Board of Immigration Appeals
                           Agency No. A074-341-218
USCA11 Case: 21-12369         Document: 55-1        Date Filed: 03/16/2023         Page: 2 of 5

       2                          Opinion of the Court                      21-12369

                               ____________________

       Before GRANT, LAGOA, and BRASHER, Circuit Judges.
       PER CURIAM:
               Emile Parker petitions this Court for review of a final admin-
       istrative order of removal issued by the Department of Homeland
       Security. The Department determined that Parker was deportable
       under § 237 of the Immigration and Nationality Act as an alien con-
       victed of an aggravated felony. See 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(2)(A)(iii).
       Parker contests the order of removal on the ground that he is a
       United States citizen by virtue of his birth to a United States citizen
       father. 1 See 8 U.S.C. §§ 1401, 1409.

              Specifically, Parker contends that he was born in Gressier,
       Haiti to Sonia Antoine, an unmarried native of Haiti, and Nick
       James Parker (formerly Nick James Poppys), a United States citizen
       who was born in Minnesota in 1920. Under 8 U.S.C. § 1409(a), a
       person born outside the United States and out of wedlock to a
       United States citizen father and a noncitizen mother is a United

       1 We generally lack jurisdiction to review a final order of removal “against an
       alien who is removable by reason of having committed a criminal offense cov-
       ered in” 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(2)(A)(iii). 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(C). But we retain
       jurisdiction to consider questions of law, including questions concerning the
       petitioner’s nationality. Id. § 1252(a)(2)(D), (b)(5)(A); see Guerrero-Lasprilla
       v. Barr, 140 S. Ct. 1062, 1068 (2020) (“questions of law” under § 1252(a)(2)(D)
       include questions involving “the application of a legal standard to undisputed
       or established facts”).
USCA11 Case: 21-12369          Document: 55-1         Date Filed: 03/16/2023           Page: 3 of 5

       21-12369                    Opinion of the Court                                  3

       States citizen and national from birth if the father met certain phys-
       ical-presence requirements and: (1) a blood relationship to the fa-
       ther is established by clear and convincing evidence; (2) the father
       had the nationality of the United States at the time of the person’s
       birth; (3) the father (if living) has agreed in writing to provide finan-
       cial support for the person until he reaches the age of 18; and
       (4) while the person is under the age of 18, the person is legitimated
       under the law of his residence or domicile, the father acknowledges
       paternity in writing under oath, or paternity is established by adju-
       dication of a competent court. Parker contends that he meets these
       requirements. 2 The government disagrees.

               When a petitioner claims to be a national of the United
       States and no genuine issue of material fact exists about the peti-
       tioner’s nationality, this Court must decide the issue. 8 U.S.C.
       § 1252(b)(5)(A). But if we determine that a genuine issue of mate-
       rial fact about the petitioner’s nationality exists, we must transfer
       the proceeding to the federal district court for the district where
       the petitioner resides “for a new hearing on the nationality claim

       2 Parker also argues that § 1409(a) violates the Equal Protection Clause of the
       5th Amendment by applying more onerous requirements for children born
       out of wedlock than those set out in § 1401 for children whose parents were
       married. Because we must transfer the case to the district court for determi-
       nation of Parker’s nationality claim, we defer consideration of his equal-pro-
       tection claim until the case is returned to us. Parker is, of course, free to make
       that argument in the district court to the extent that it is relevant to his nation-
       ality claim.
USCA11 Case: 21-12369      Document: 55-1       Date Filed: 03/16/2023     Page: 4 of 5

       4                       Opinion of the Court                  21-12369

       and a decision on that claim as if” it had been brought in the district
       court as an action for a declaratory judgment. Id. § 1252(b)(5)(B).

               A genuine issue of material fact about Parker’s nationality
       exists here. Primarily, the parties dispute whether American-born
       Nick James Parker was Parker’s father, as Parker claims. In its final
       administrative order of removal, the Department relied on its 2012
       determination that the Haitian birth certificate and legitimation
       certificate Parker produced identifying Nick James Parker as his fa-
       ther were both fraudulent. Parker has since produced another Hai-
       tian birth certificate—again identifying Nick James Parker as his fa-
       ther—that was authenticated by the U.S. Department of State in
       2013, along with a birth certificate, death certificate, school records,
       and military records for Nick James Poppys a/k/a Nick James Par-
       ker. He also produced a notarized but unsworn letter from his
       mother explaining her relationship with Nick James Parker and
       claiming that he was Parker’s father.

              The government disputes Parker’s right to citizenship,
       claiming that Department records indicate that Parker’s father may
       have been a Canadian citizen named Nick George Parker rather
       than American-born Nick James Parker. The government argues
       that the fact that Parker has a Canadian passport and has given at
       least one sworn statement claiming to be a citizen of Canada (as
       well as an American citizen) corroborate this information because
       Parker could not have been granted Canadian citizenship through
       Nick James Parker. Both parties rely on documents not included
USCA11 Case: 21-12369         Document: 55-1         Date Filed: 03/16/2023          Page: 5 of 5

       21-12369                   Opinion of the Court                                 5

       in the administrative record before the Department at the time it
       issued the final administrative order of removal.

              Because we conclude that a genuine dispute of material fact
       exists regarding Parker’s claim to United States citizenship, we
       GRANT the government’s motion to transfer the case to the
       United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida
       (where Parker resides) for a de novo hearing on the nationality
       claim pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(5)(B). We DENY Parker’s mo-
       tion for summary judgment on his nationality claim for the same
       reason, and we DENY the government’s motion to file a supple-
       mental appendix in this Court. We HOLD IN ABEYANCE Par-
       ker’s petition for review pending the resolution of the nationality
       claim in the district court. 3

           MATTER TRANSFERRED TO THE U.S. DISTRICT
       COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA.

       3 This Court has not yet decided in a published opinion whether, following
       the district court’s decision on a nationality claim under § 1252(b)(5)(B), the
       losing party is required to file a notice of appeal to obtain review of that deci-
       sion by this Court. Although we do not reach that question today, the parties
       are advised to file a timely notice of appeal if they wish to seek review of the
       district court’s determination on the issue of nationality.