444 U.S. 252 (1980), Supreme Court of the United States
Vance v. Terrazas is a cornerstone case at the intersection of constitutional citizenship and federal nationality law.
Does the Government have to prove that a citizen specifically intended to relinquish U.S. citizenship to establish expatriation, and if so, what standard of proof governs that showing?
Under the Fourteenth Amendment and the Immigration and Nationality Act, loss of U.S. citizenship requires that the citizen voluntarily perform one of the expatriating acts enumerated in 8 U.S.C. § 1481(a) with the intent to relinquish U.S. nationality. The Government bears the burden to prove intent, and the Constitution permits Congress to prescribe, and courts to apply, a preponderance-of-the-evidence standard for that proof. Voluntary commission of an expatriating act is not, by itself, conclusive of intent, but intent may be inferred from a person's statements and conduct, including an express oath of allegiance to a foreign state.
Yes. The Government must prove that the citizen intended to relinquish U.S. citizenship, but it need do so only by a preponderance of the evidence. Performance of a voluntary expatriating act does not automatically establish loss of citizenship; the trier of fact must find intent, which may be inferred from the act and surrounding circumstances. The case was remanded for application of the correct evidentiary standard.
Vance v. Terrazas completes the modern expatriation framework initiated by Afroyim: the Government must prove both a voluntary expatriating act and an intent to relinquish citizenship, but it may do so under the ordinary civil preponderance standard. The case is pivotal for understanding evidentiary burdens in citizenship litigation, the distinction between voluntariness and intent, and how constitutional constraints channel Congress's authority under the INA. For practitioners and students, Terrazas informs State Department adjudications, litigation under 8 U.S.C. § 1503, and the treatment of dual nationals who perform acts—such as taking foreign oaths—that can be powerful but not conclusive evidence of expatriating intent.