The Ninth Circuit has rejected a challenge to the derivation of citizenship statute, finding that the differing treatment for the children of married parents from those of legally separated parents bears a rational basis to the congressional goal of protecting the parental rights of the non-citizen parent. The court rejected the argument that the Supreme Court’s decision in Morales Santana requires the application of a heightened standard of scrutiny to any law that differentiates based on parental marital status, finding that the discussion of parental marital status in Morales Santana was limited to laws that discriminate based on the child’s legitimacy. Since the law at issue looks at the parents’ marital status at a time after the child’s birth, the heightened standard of review related to legitimacy distinctions does not apply.
The full text of US v. Mayea-Pulido can be found here:
http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2020/01/03/18-50223.pdf