Military Naturalization After NJP, Administrative Action, or Court-Martial

An Article 15 is not the same as a civilian criminal conviction. A letter of reprimand is not a judgment of guilt. An administrative investigation is not necessarily a final finding. A court-martial, however, can create consequences under both military and immigration law.

USCIS does not always treat those distinctions clearly—and service members sometimes make the situation worse by failing to disclose a military event because they were told it “was not a real conviction.”

When a service member or veteran applies for naturalization, USCIS may examine:

• Article 15 or other nonjudicial punishment;
• Letters of reprimand, admonishment, or counseling;
• Adverse performance actions;
• Command-directed or law-enforcement investigations;
• Administrative-separation proceedings;
• Separation-board findings;
• Summary, special, or general court-martial proceedings;
• Military protective orders;
• Character of service;
• The narrative reason for separation;
• Form N-426 certification;
• DD Form 214 and other service records;
• Disclosure on Form N-400;
• Good moral character; and
• Whether the underlying conduct makes the applicant inadmissible or removable.

Military discipline does not automatically prevent naturalization. But the label placed on the military action does not end the immigration analysis. USCIS can consider underlying conduct even when there was no criminal conviction, and a general court-martial judgment can qualify as a conviction under federal immigration law.

Before filing Form N-400, the applicant must determine what happened, what the complete military record shows, what must be disclosed, and what USCIS may do with the information.

National Security Law Firm brings military justice and immigration experience together in one strategy.

Our immigration practice is led by Justin M. Price, a former Immigration Judge, former Department of Homeland Security trial attorney, former Air Force Judge Advocate and military prosecutor, and former public defender. Justin has spent more than 25 years evaluating, prosecuting, defending, and adjudicating federal matters.

He understands how commanders impose administrative and disciplinary action, how military prosecutors build courts-martial, how DHS analyzes convictions and conduct, how a federal decision-maker evaluates credibility and good moral character, and how to prepare the applicant without creating new admissions or inconsistencies.

Do not file Form N-400 based on the assumption that NJP “does not count” or that an honorable discharge resolves every immigration issue.

Schedule a confidential consultation with National Security Law Firm before USCIS examines your military and immigration records.

Can You Become a U.S. Citizen After Military Discipline?

Possibly.

The answer depends on:

• The form of military action;
• The underlying conduct;
• Whether a criminal conviction exists for immigration purposes;
• The date of the conduct;
• The sentence or punishment;
• Whether the conduct creates a statutory naturalization bar;
• Whether the applicant can establish good moral character;
• Whether the service was honorable;
• Character of discharge;
• The naturalization provision under which the applicant files;
• What was previously disclosed to immigration or military officials; and
• Whether filing Form N-400 could expose the applicant to removal.

Some applicants remain eligible and need a carefully documented explanation. Others face a temporary bar and should wait. Still others may have a conviction or immigration violation that makes filing dangerous.

The objective is not merely to explain why the service member deserves citizenship. It is to determine whether the person satisfies every statutory requirement and whether USCIS’s review could threaten the person’s existing status.

Article 15 and Nonjudicial Punishment

Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice authorizes commanders to impose nonjudicial punishment for certain alleged offenses without trial by court-martial.

Depending on the branch, NJP may be called:

• Article 15;
• Captain’s Mast;
• Office Hours; or
• Nonjudicial punishment.

Possible punishment can include:

• Reduction in rank;
• Forfeiture of pay;
• Extra duty;
• Restriction;
• Correctional custody;
• Reprimand; or
• Other authorized punishment.

Is an Article 15 a Criminal Conviction?

Generally, no. Article 15 is expressly nonjudicial. It is not a judgment of guilt entered by a criminal court.

That distinction matters because many immigration consequences depend on whether a “conviction” exists under INA § 101(a)(48)(A).

But the absence of a conviction does not make NJP irrelevant.

USCIS may still consider:

• The underlying conduct;
• The service member’s statements;
• Admissions in the NJP record;
• The commander’s findings;
• The punishment imposed;
• Whether the conduct occurred during the good-moral-character period;
• Whether it reflects an “unlawful act”;
• Whether it affected honorable service or discharge; and
• Whether it was accurately disclosed on Form N-400.

An applicant should not describe an Article 15 as a conviction when it is not one. The applicant also should not omit it merely because it was nonjudicial.

Letters of Reprimand, Counseling, and Adverse Administrative Records

Military personnel files can contain:

• Letters of counseling;
• Letters of admonishment;
• Letters of reprimand;
• General Officer Memoranda of Reprimand;
• Adverse performance evaluations;
• Unfavorable information;
• Control-roster actions;
• Bars to reenlistment;
• Promotion or retention actions;
• Command-directed investigations;
• Inspector General records; and
• Administrative findings.

These actions generally are not criminal convictions by themselves.

Nevertheless, USCIS may review the underlying conduct when evaluating:

• Good moral character;
• Truthfulness;
• Honorable service;
• Form N-426;
• Discharge characterization;
• Attachment to constitutional principles; or
• Eligibility for a discretionary immigration benefit.

The weight of the record depends on what it actually proves.

A letter may repeat an allegation without independently establishing it. An investigation may be unsubstantiated, partially substantiated, or later corrected. A reprimand may have been locally filed or permanently filed. An applicant may have submitted a rebuttal that does not appear with the government’s selected document.

A naturalization filing should use the complete record—not a single adverse document taken out of context.

Administrative-Separation Proceedings

Administrative separation can affect naturalization in several ways.

The record may involve:

• Notice of proposed separation;
• Basis for separation;
• Written response;
• Conditional waiver;
• Separation-board proceedings;
• Findings and recommendations;
• Separation authority action;
• Characterization of service;
• Narrative reason for separation;
• Reentry code; and
• Final DD Form 214.

A Proposed Separation Is Not a Final Discharge

USCIS should distinguish between:

• Pending allegations;
• A board’s findings;
• A recommendation;
• Final separation-authority action; and
• The characterization ultimately issued.

But a pending separation can still affect current certification of military service and the timing of a naturalization application.

Character of Service Can Be Decisive

Naturalization under INA §§ 328 and 329 depends on honorable military service and, for separated applicants, the applicable discharge requirements.

A separation resulting in:

• Honorable discharge;
• General discharge under honorable conditions;
• Other-than-honorable discharge;
• Bad-conduct discharge;
• Dishonorable discharge; or
• Uncharacterized separation

can produce materially different naturalization consequences.

The narrative reason for separation and characterization of service are related but distinct. USCIS must apply the immigration statute and current policy rather than rely on a general impression that the military record was “bad.”

Court-Martial Charges and Convictions

Court-martial proceedings require a different analysis from NJP and administrative action.

The military justice system includes:

• Summary court-martial;
• Special court-martial; and
• General court-martial.

The immigration consequences depend on the type of proceeding, plea or findings, offense, sentence, final disposition, and governing immigration law.

General Court-Martial Convictions

The Board of Immigration Appeals held in Matter of Rivera-Valencia that a judgment of guilt entered by a general court-martial qualifies as a “conviction” under INA § 101(a)(48)(A).

That means a general court-martial conviction may create the same types of immigration consequences as a civilian conviction, including potential:

• Crime-involving-moral-turpitude issues;
• Controlled-substance consequences;
• Firearms consequences;
• Domestic-violence consequences;
• Aggravated-felony allegations;
• Good-moral-character bars;
• Inadmissibility;
• Deportability; and
• Naturalization denial.

The UCMJ offense must still be analyzed under immigration law. The fact that a conviction arose in a military court does not determine whether it falls within a particular immigration category.

Special and Summary Courts-Martial

Special and summary court-martial dispositions require individualized analysis. Counsel should not automatically assume that every military disposition is—or is not—a conviction under INA § 101(a)(48)(A).

Relevant considerations include:

• Whether a formal judgment of guilt was entered;
• Whether the tribunal qualifies as a court for immigration purposes;
• Whether the proceeding was genuinely criminal in nature;
• The burden of proof;
• The procedural rights available;
• Whether the service member entered a guilty plea;
• Whether punishment, a penalty, or a restraint on liberty was imposed; and
• The finality and status of the disposition.

The complete record of proceedings is necessary.

Charges Without a Conviction

USCIS may consider conduct even if charges were:

• Withdrawn;
• Dismissed;
• Referred to NJP;
• Resolved through administrative action;
• Resulted in acquittal;
• Declined for prosecution; or
• Never referred to trial.

A dismissed charge is not a conviction. But USCIS may still ask about the underlying event when evaluating good moral character, and the applicant bears the burden of establishing naturalization eligibility.

The response should make clear what was alleged, what was proven, how the case ended, and what evidence exists.

Why Justin Price’s Experience Is Different

Military naturalization after discipline requires someone who understands both what the military action means and how immigration authorities will use it.

Justin Price has handled these questions from every relevant side.

Air Force Judge Advocate and Military Prosecutor

As an Air Force Judge Advocate and military prosecutor, Justin advised commanders and handled military justice matters.

He understands:

• How Article 15 proceedings work;
• What command investigations establish;
• How charges are preferred and referred;
• The differences among administrative action, NJP, and court-martial;
• How military dispositions are recorded;
• The significance of characterization and narrative reason;
• How military personnel files can be incomplete or misleading; and
• Which records are necessary to understand what actually occurred.

That experience allows NSLF to translate the military record accurately instead of treating every adverse entry as a civilian conviction.

More Than 12 Years Representing DHS

As a DHS trial attorney, Justin handled government cases involving criminal history, removability, inadmissibility, statutory eligibility, documentary evidence, and credibility.

He understands how DHS analyzes:

• Conviction records;
• Admissions;
• Conduct without conviction;
• Controlled-substance allegations;
• Crimes involving moral turpitude;
• Aggravated felonies;
• Good moral character;
• Inconsistent applications; and
• Failure to disclose an offense.

Former Immigration Judge

As an Immigration Judge, Justin evaluated criminal and immigration records, testimony, credibility, and federal statutory arguments.

He knows that a naturalization applicant must do more than show that military service was honorable overall. The applicant must establish that the particular conviction or conduct does not create a legal bar and that every answer provided to USCIS is accurate.

Former Public Defender

Justin also understands the defense perspective. As a former public defender, he knows the difference between an allegation, an admission, a negotiated disposition, and a judgment of guilt.

He understands why the government’s summary may omit defenses, procedural errors, mitigation, or the actual result of the case.

Few attorneys bring together experience as a military prosecutor, defense attorney, DHS trial attorney, and Immigration Judge.

Form N-426 After Military Discipline

Form N-426, Request for Certification of Military or Naval Service, is used by current service members seeking naturalization based on their military service to request verification of that service.

The form may confirm:

• Branch and component;
• Service dates;
• Active-duty or Selected Reserve status;
• Whether the person is serving honorably; and
• Information about separation, when applicable.

USCIS may compare Form N-426 with:

• Article 15 records;
• Pending separation proceedings;
• Court-martial charges;
• Personnel records;
• Performance reports;
• Discharge records; and
• Other military information.

Military discipline does not automatically prevent a proper certification of honorable service. However, pending misconduct or separation proceedings may affect whether and how the military certifies the form.

A service member should not pressure a certifying official to sign an inaccurate form or conceal ongoing proceedings.

Former Service Members

Under current USCIS policy, separated or discharged service members applying under INA §§ 328 or 329 generally are not required to file Form N-426. USCIS instead reviews applicable separation documentation and military records, including DD Form 214 or other official evidence.

A veteran should still obtain the complete record. The DD Form 214 alone may not explain the conduct, disposition, multiple periods of service, or why a particular characterization was issued.

Learn more about Form N-426 military naturalization problems.

Honorable Service and Character of Discharge

Military naturalization depends not only on whether the applicant served, but on whether the service meets the applicable honorable-service requirements.

Counsel should review:

• The naturalization provision;
• Each period of service;
• Characterization of every discharge;
• Current duty status;
• Whether a separation is pending;
• Form N-426;
• DD Forms 214;
• NGB Forms 22;
• Reserve records;
• Administrative-separation records;
• Court-martial sentence;
• Discharge-upgrade history; and
• Military-record corrections.

Multiple periods of service can complicate eligibility. An applicant may have one honorable enlistment and a later adverse period. USCIS policy under INA § 328 requires careful analysis of all discharges, while INA § 329 contains its own rules concerning honorable service and separation.

An applicant should not assume that one honorable DD Form 214 or one adverse discharge answers the entire question.

Related resources include:

• Military naturalization with an uncharacterized discharge
• Military naturalization after an OTH, bad-conduct, or dishonorable discharge
• Military discharge upgrades for immigration and citizenship

Good Moral Character After Military Discipline

Naturalization applicants must establish good moral character during the applicable statutory period and until taking the Oath of Allegiance.

The period depends on the naturalization provision.

INA § 328

An applicant seeking naturalization based on qualifying peacetime military service generally must establish good moral character for the five years immediately preceding the application and through naturalization.

INA § 329

An applicant seeking naturalization based on service during a designated period of hostilities generally must establish good moral character for at least one year immediately preceding filing and through naturalization.

Conduct Outside the Statutory Period

USCIS may consider earlier conduct when assessing present moral character, particularly when the applicant has not demonstrated rehabilitation or the earlier conduct relates to conduct within the statutory period.

Potential Good-Moral-Character Issues

Military discipline may involve conduct USCIS characterizes as:

• A permanent statutory bar;
• A conditional statutory bar;
• An aggravated-felony conviction;
• A crime involving moral turpitude;
• Controlled-substance conduct;
• False testimony;
• An unlawful act;
• Adultery that destroyed a marriage under the applicable standard;
• Failure to support dependents;
• Domestic violence;
• Fraud;
• Theft;
• Obstruction;
• Lack of candor; or
• Conduct reflecting adversely on present character.

An honorable discharge does not conclusively establish good moral character for immigration purposes. Conversely, military discipline does not automatically establish that the applicant lacks good moral character.

USCIS must apply the governing immigration law to the actual disposition and conduct.

Review our guide to good moral character for military naturalization.

Disclosure on Form N-400

Naturalization applicants must answer Form N-400 truthfully and completely.

The form requires disclosures broader than final civilian convictions. Depending on the question and current form version, USCIS may ask about arrests, citations, detention, charges, convictions, alternative sentencing, military discipline, membership, weapons, training, and conduct for which the person was never arrested.

An applicant should not answer “no” merely because:

• Article 15 is not a conviction;
• The charge was dismissed;
• The record was sealed;
• The commander handled it administratively;
• The service member was acquitted;
• The punishment was minor;
• The applicant received an honorable discharge;
• The record is old;
• The conduct occurred outside the good-moral-character period; or
• Someone said military records are confidential.

The legally safe approach is not overdisclosure without analysis or concealment based on terminology. It is to determine exactly what each question asks and prepare an accurate answer supported by the record.

False Testimony Can Create a New Bar

An applicant who intentionally provides false oral testimony under oath to obtain an immigration benefit may be barred from establishing good moral character under INA § 101(f)(6).

Materiality is not necessarily required for the false-testimony bar.

A service member who may have remained eligible despite the original Article 15 or administrative action can create a separate naturalization problem by lying about it during the USCIS interview.

Military Versus Civilian Dispositions

The immigration analysis should never rely solely on the shorthand description “military conviction” or “administrative issue.”

Immigration Consequences of a Court-Martial Conviction

A court-martial conviction may affect:

• Naturalization;
• Good moral character;
• Lawful permanent resident status;
• Admissibility;
• Deportability;
• Eligibility for waivers or relief;
• Travel;
• Adjustment of status;
• Security clearances;
• Federal employment; and
• Potential future removal proceedings.

The attorney must analyze:

1. The exact UCMJ provision;
2. The elements of the offense;
3. The plea or findings;
4. The sentence imposed;
5. The possible sentence;
6. Whether a conviction exists under INA § 101(a)(48)(A);
7. Whether the offense matches an immigration category;
8. The date of admission and conviction;
9. Potential statutory exceptions; and
10. Whether post-conviction or military appellate relief exists.

A general court-martial conviction should not be evaluated using only the civilian label that seems most similar. Immigration law often requires a categorical comparison between the elements of the military offense and the federal immigration definition.

Applicants with civilian arrests or convictions should review our separate page on military naturalization with a criminal history.

Pending NJP, Investigation, Separation, or Court-Martial

Filing Form N-400 while military proceedings are pending can create significant risks.

USCIS may:

• Request additional evidence;
• Continue the naturalization examination;
• Issue an RFE or NOID;
• Seek updated Form N-426 information;
• Review command and investigative records;
• Deny for failure to establish eligibility;
• Reexamine the case after final military action; or
• Refer potentially disqualifying information for enforcement.

The service member may also be asked to give sworn testimony about an event that remains under military or criminal investigation.

Counsel should coordinate:

• Naturalization timing;
• Military defense;
• Fifth Amendment concerns;
• Form N-426 strategy;
• Administrative-separation response;
• Potential discharge characterization;
• Immigration consequences of any plea or disposition; and
• Whether filing should be delayed.

A naturalization filing should not undermine the defense in a pending court-martial or administrative proceeding.

Discharge Upgrades and Record Corrections

A discharge upgrade or military-record correction may improve the record when:

• The characterization was unjust or erroneous;
• The narrative reason is inaccurate;
• Personnel records omit favorable findings;
• NJP was set aside;
• A court-martial conviction was reversed;
• Service dates are incorrect;
• The wrong reentry code was assigned; or
• An adverse record resulted from procedural error.

Possible forums include a Discharge Review Board or a Board for Correction of Military or Naval Records.

However:

• Filing for an upgrade does not automatically establish naturalization eligibility;
• An application does not extend an N-400 or N-336 deadline;
• A pending correction does not require USCIS to assume the record will change;
• A record correction made solely for equitable reasons may not eliminate every immigration consequence; and
• The military and immigration strategies should be coordinated.

How NSLF Evaluates the Case

1. Identify the Naturalization Path

We determine whether the applicant may qualify under:

• INA § 328;
• INA § 329;
• The general five-year rule;
• A spousal provision; or
• Another naturalization basis.

2. Reconstruct the Military Proceeding

We may review:

• Charge sheets;
• Article 15 records;
• Election and appeal documents;
• Reprimands and rebuttals;
• Investigation reports;
• Administrative-separation notices;
• Board findings;
• Court-martial records;
• Convening-authority action;
• Appellate decisions;
• Discharge documents; and
• Personnel records.

3. Determine Whether a Conviction Exists

We analyze the disposition under INA § 101(a)(48)(A) and applicable precedent rather than relying on the name of the military proceeding.

4. Analyze the Underlying Offense

We determine whether the offense or conduct may involve:

• Aggravated felony;
• Crime involving moral turpitude;
• Controlled substance;
• Firearm;
• Domestic violence;
• Child abuse;
• Fraud;
• False claim to citizenship;
• Persecution or national-security concerns; or
• Another naturalization or removal ground.

5. Analyze Honorable Service and Discharge

We review Form N-426, each period of service, discharge characterization, narrative reason, and pending or completed correction proceedings.

6. Evaluate Filing Risk

We determine:

• Whether the applicant is currently eligible;
• Whether additional time or rehabilitation is needed;
• Whether filing could lead to removal;
• Whether military proceedings should conclude first;
• What must be disclosed;
• What evidence should accompany the application; and
• How the applicant should prepare for the interview.

7. Prepare the Application and Interview

When filing is appropriate, the case may include:

• A legal brief;
• Certified military records;
• Certified criminal dispositions;
• Applicant declarations;
• Evidence explaining the proceeding;
• Rehabilitation evidence;
• Form N-426 or separation records;
• Good-moral-character evidence; and
• Detailed interview preparation.

Common Mistakes

Assuming NJP Does Not Need to Be Disclosed

The absence of a conviction does not mean the event is outside every Form N-400 question or USCIS inquiry.

Calling NJP a Criminal Conviction

Mischaracterizing the proceeding can make the case appear worse than it is and lead USCIS to apply the wrong legal framework.

Submitting Only the DD Form 214

A DD Form 214 may show the final characterization but not the allegations, findings, disposition, or evidence necessary to explain what occurred.

Relying Exclusively on an Honorable Discharge

An honorable discharge is important, but USCIS separately evaluates good moral character, criminal history, truthful disclosure, and statutory eligibility.

Filing While Charges Are Pending

The N-400 interview may require sworn testimony about the same conduct involved in a pending military case.

Providing an Explanation Before Reviewing the Record

An applicant’s memory may conflict with the Article 15, investigation, or record of trial. Counsel should examine the documents before submitting a declaration.

Assuming an Expungement or Set-Aside Ends the Analysis

Immigration law determines whether a conviction remains effective. The label used by a military or civilian forum does not necessarily control.

Frequently Asked Questions

Does an Article 15 prevent military naturalization?

Not automatically. An Article 15 generally is not a criminal conviction, but USCIS may examine the underlying conduct, good moral character, honorable service, and disclosure on Form N-400.

Is NJP a conviction for immigration purposes?

Generally, NJP is nonjudicial and is not a formal criminal judgment entered by a court. The underlying conduct and any admissions may still have immigration significance.

Is a court-martial conviction an immigration conviction?

A judgment of guilt entered by a general court-martial qualifies as a conviction under BIA precedent. Other military proceedings require case-specific analysis.

Must I disclose an Article 15 on Form N-400?

The answer depends on the wording of the current Form N-400 questions and the complete event. Do not omit it solely because it was nonjudicial. An attorney should determine how the event must be disclosed and described.

What if the Article 15 was set aside?

A set-aside may materially affect the analysis. USCIS should receive the complete set-aside record rather than only the original adverse action.

What if court-martial charges were dismissed?

Dismissal means there is no conviction based on those charges. USCIS may still examine the alleged conduct when evaluating good moral character. The dismissal and underlying record should be presented accurately.

Does an acquittal prevent USCIS from considering the allegations?

An acquittal means the prosecution did not obtain a conviction. USCIS may still review conduct evidence under the naturalization burden, but it must account for the acquittal and the strength and reliability of the remaining evidence.

Can I naturalize with a general discharge?

Possibly. A general discharge is under honorable conditions, but eligibility depends on the applicable naturalization provision, all service periods, Form N-426 or discharge records, good moral character, and the underlying conduct.

Can I naturalize with an OTH discharge?

An OTH discharge creates significant issues but does not permit a one-sentence answer. The service periods, statutory basis, discharge record, and possible upgrade must be analyzed.

What if administrative-separation proceedings are still pending?

Filing may be risky because the final characterization and service certification remain unresolved. Naturalization and military-defense strategies should be coordinated.

Can USCIS deny naturalization even if I was never convicted?

Yes. The applicant bears the burden of establishing good moral character and all other naturalization requirements. USCIS may consider reliable evidence of unlawful conduct even without a conviction.

Can filing Form N-400 lead to removal proceedings?

Potentially. If the military record reveals a removable conviction, controlled-substance conduct, fraud, unlawful permanent residence, or another removal ground, USCIS may refer the case for enforcement.

What if USCIS has already issued an RFE or NOID?

The response deadline is running. Review our page about military immigration RFE and NOID responses.

What if USCIS already denied my N-400?

A Form N-336 hearing request generally must be filed quickly. Review our page about military naturalization denials and Form N-336 hearings.

Why Choose National Security Law Firm?

These cases require more than an immigration attorney who reads a DD Form 214 or a military lawyer who recognizes the UCMJ charge.

National Security Law Firm understands:

• Military justice;
• Administrative separation;
• Discharge characterization;
• Federal immigration law;
• Naturalization;
• Criminal-immigration consequences;
• Removal risk;
• Security clearances; and
• Federal employment consequences.

Justin Price has handled federal matters as an Immigration Judge, DHS trial attorney, Air Force Judge Advocate and military prosecutor, and public defender.

NSLF can determine:

• What the military proceeding legally established;
• Whether a conviction exists under immigration law;
• Whether the offense creates a statutory bar;
• How the conduct affects good moral character;
• Whether service remains honorable;
• What Form N-400 requires the applicant to disclose;
• Whether Form N-426 or discharge evidence is sufficient;
• Whether filing creates removal risk; and
• How to present the case to USCIS accurately and persuasively.

Explore our principal page on U.S. citizenship through military service and our complete military immigration law services.

Your Military Record Does Not Speak for Itself

USCIS may see “Article 15,” “court-martial,” “misconduct,” or “administrative separation” and draw conclusions that the complete record does not support.

But the opposite mistake is equally dangerous: assuming military discipline does not matter because it was not a civilian conviction.

Before filing, NSLF can determine:

• Whether the disposition qualifies as a conviction;
• Whether the conduct occurred during the good-moral-character period;
• Whether an immigration bar applies;
• Whether military service can be certified as honorable;
• How multiple periods of service affect eligibility;
• What must be disclosed;
• Whether a correction or discharge upgrade should be pursued; and
• Whether filing Form N-400 is legally supportable or dangerously premature.

Let us review the record before USCIS defines it for you.

Schedule a confidential consultation with National Security Law Firm.

You served the United States. When one military proceeding threatens to define your path to citizenship, It’s Our Turn to Fight for You.

---

Attorney and Editorial Information

Attorney author: Justin M. Price, Former Immigration Judge, Former DHS Trial Attorney, Former Air Force Judge Advocate and Military Prosecutor
Last legally reviewed: August 24, 2026

Statutory and Regulatory Authority

• INA § 101(a)(48)(A), 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(48)(A)
• INA § 101(f), 8 U.S.C. § 1101(f)
• INA § 316, 8 U.S.C. § 1427
• INA § 328, 8 U.S.C. § 1439
• INA § 329, 8 U.S.C. § 1440
• Article 15, UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. § 815
• 8 C.F.R. Parts 316, 328, and 329

Authoritative Sources

• USCIS Policy Manual: Military Naturalization Under INA § 328
• USCIS Policy Manual: Military Naturalization Under INA § 329
• USCIS Policy Manual: Good Moral Character
• USCIS Policy Manual: Good-Moral-Character Adjudicative Factors
• USCIS: Form N-426
• Matter of Rivera-Valencia, 24 I&N Dec. 484 (BIA 2008)
• Article 15, UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. § 815
• USCIS: Form N-400 and Instructions