nated by his dishonorable discharge on April 10, 1948. On October 19, 1948, his United States citizenship was revoked by order of the United States District Court at San Francisco, Calif., pursuant to the provisions of section 704 of the Nationality Act of 1940, as amended.

The Commissioner found that because of the cancellation of his citizenship, respondent must be regarded as having been at all times an alien, and therefore concluded that he is deportable under the Immigration Act of 1924. The Commissioner found that the naturalization of respondent under section 701 of the Nationality Act of 1940, as amended, was subject to "a condition subsequent," because his citizenship might be revoked if he were dishonorably discharged from the military forces of the United States. We disagree with the conclusion of the Commissioner that respondent was granted citizenship subject to "a condition subsequent." Citizenship of the United States is not so granted by United States courts. Section 701 of the Nationality Act of 1940, as amended, provides, in part:

Notwithstanding the provisions of section 303 and 326 of this act, any person not a citizen, regardless of age, who has served or hereafter serves honorably in the military or naval forces of the United States during the present war * * * may be naturalized upon compliance with all the requirements of the naturalization laws. * *

Section 704 (supra), provides, in part:

* citizenship granted pursuant to this title may be revoked as to any person subsequently dishonorably discharged from the military or naval forces in accordance with section 338 of this act; and such ground for revocation shall be in addition to any other provided by law.

Subsequent conditions can arise which create a ground for withdrawing the citizenship previously granted. This is our interpretation of the meaning of the statute. Whatever the situation was before the alien became a citizen with regard to his deportability, after he is granted citizenship the prior grounds for deportation no longer exist. The fact that he again has become deportable does not revive the old warrant. We do not believe that respondent can be deported on a proceeding instituted before he was naturalized.

It is our conclusion that the present proceeding must be canceled without prejudice to the institution of any new proceeding the Immigration and Naturalization Service may feel is warranted.

Order: It is ordered that the present proceeding be canceled without prejudice to the institution of a new proceeding by the Immigration and Naturalization Service.

IN THE MATTER OF A

(HUSBAND AND WIFE)

In EXCLUSION Proceedings

A-7910824 and A-7910825

Decided by Board April 11, 1951

Subversive, proscribed organization, member of organization affiliated withAct of 1918, as amended-Exclusion ground-"Voluntary" membership or affiliation-Public Law 14 (March 28, 1951)-Term "voluntary" examined— Evidence.

The uncontradicted testimony of the male applicant that he was required to join the Profesoruse of the Workers of Higher Skills, a trade union in Russia, under the circumstances indicated, is deemed sufficient, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, to make a finding that his membership in such trade union was involuntary and his past membership therein is not a basis for exclusion in view of the provisions of the act of March 28, 1951 (Public Law 14). (See Int. Dec. #253, 4, I. & N. Dec. 341.)

EXCLUDED BY BOARD OF SPECIAL INQUIRY:

Male applicant:

Act of 1918, as amended-Member of an organization which was affiliated with the Communist Party of Russia. Female applicant: Act of 1948, as amended-Not an eligible displaced person.

BEFORE THE BOARD

Discussion: This is an appeal from the decision of the Assistant Commissioner, Adjudications Division, finding the applicants inadmissible to the United States on the grounds above stated.

The applicants, husband and wife, are seeking to enter the United States as Displaced Persons. The wife has been found inadmissible only because her husband is inadmissible.

The applicants are Russians by birth, and lived in their native country until 1935 when, because of their antagonism to communism, they fled to Poland. There they lived until 1945 when they were deported to Germany. Both are now living in a displaced persons camp in Germany. The male applicant is a university graduate (1914) and specialized in forestry and botany, and in particular peat bog science. He testified that after graduating from the university in 1914, he continued his scientific work, principally in the peat bog field at the university from which he graduated as well as other institutions. While so employed, and beginning about 1923 or 1924, he was required to

join a trade union, or Profesoruse, known as the Profesoruse of the Workers of Higher Skills. Dues for this organization were deducted from the salary of the members.

It is because of his membership in this organization that the male applicant has been found inadmissible to the United States by the Immigration and Naturalization Service under section 1 (2) (C) (v) of the act of October 16, 1918, as amended by section 22 of the Internal Security Act of 1950, as a member of an organization which is an affiliate of the Communist Party of Russia.

This case is directly affected by an amendment to the Internal Security Act, approved March 28, 1951. Under this amendment the terms "members of" and "affiliated with," as used in the act of October 16, 1918, as amended, shall include only membership or affiliation which is or was voluntary. According to the uncontradicted testimony of the male applicant, he was required to join the Profesoruse of the Workers of Higher Skills. There is no evidence to the contrary. We feel his testimony in this particular should be accepted without corroboration, since the practice in totalitarian countries of requiring workers to join organizations of this character is well known. We, therefore, accept the testimony of the male applicant that his membership in the Profesoruse of the Workers of Higher Skills was involuntary and, hence, under the act of March 28, 1951, his past membership in this organization is not a basis for exclusion.

The wife has been found inadmissible solely because her husband was considered inadmissible.

Order: It is ordered that the appeal be sustained, and the applicants be found admissible to the United States upon securing valid replacement visas.

Editor's note.-On April 27, 1951, the B. I. A. entered a decision in the Matter of N, A-7927146, unreported, citing the above cases and finding the alien not inadmissible as a member of an organization affiliated with the Communist Party of Russia, to wit: "The Trade Union of Workers of Education" in Russia. The alien was a teacher of mathematics and physics in the U. S. S. R. and admitted membership from 1925 to 1941 in the above trade union. Membership in this trade union was found to be compulsory for all teachers and the entire personnel of the school. Dues were paid by compulsory deductions from salaries. The alien discontinued teaching in September 1941 because of induction into the Soviet Army (wherein he served as a private until captured by the Germans in October 1941).

260397-54-23

IN THE MATTER OF M

In EXCLUSION Proceedings

A-7945007

Decided by Board April 12, 1951

Subversive, membership in a subsidiary or affiliate of the Communist Party-Exclusion ground, service in the Soviet Army-Act of October 16, 1918, as amended by section 22 of the Internal Security Act of 1950-Public Law 14 (March 28, 1951).

Service in the armed forces of any country (Russia in this case) whether voluntary or not, is not to be regarded, of itself, as membership or affiliation with, any proscribed party or organization, and does not, of itself, constitute a ground for exclusion. (Public Law 14, act of March 28, 1951 (H. R. 2339, S. 728) and instructions governing its application).

EXCLUDED BY BOARD OF SPECIAL INQUIRY:

Act of October 16, 1918, as amended-Service in the armed forces of a totalitarian government.

BEFORE THE BOARD

Discussion: This is an appeal from an order entered by the Acting Assistant Commissioner on March 15, 1951, affirming the appellant's exclusion on the above-stated ground at the port of New York by a board of special inquiry. Counsel in her exceptions to the order contends that the appellant's service in the armed forces of a totalitarian government was compulsory, leaving him no alternative with regard to membership in a branch of a totalitarian party as contemplated under the Internal Security Act of 1950.

The appellant, a native and citizen of Russia, male, 26 years of age, unmarried, last arrived in the United States ex-U. S. N. S. General Harry Taylor at the port of New York on December 28, 1950. He sought to enter for permanent residence and presented a nonpreference-quota immigration visa issued under Public Law 774 as a displaced person. He testified that he was drafted into the Army of the U. S. S. R. and saw service therein from 1941 until his capture by the Germans during February of 1943. Under a ruling of the Attorney General that service in the Soviet army, both present and former, shall be regarded as membership in a subsidiary or affiliate

of the Communist Party, the appellant's exclusion by the board of special inquiry was mandatory under section 1 (2) (C) of the act of October 16, 1918, as amended by section 22 of the Internal Security Act of 1950 (files 56307/191, 56305/252).

The act of October 16, 1918, as amended by the Internal Security Act of 1950, now excepts from its provisions an alien whose membership in or affiliation with a branch of a totalitarian party of a foreign state was compulsory (H. R. 2339, 82d Cong., approved March 28, 1951). Instructions which have been promulgated to govern the application of H. R. 2339 (supra), state in part :

Service, whether voluntary or not, in the armed forces of any country shall not be regarded, of itself, as membership or affiliation with, any proscribed party er organization, and shall not, of itself, constitute a ground for exclusion.

Accordingly, we find the appellant admissible as a nonquota immigrant under section 6 (a) (3) of the Immigration Act of 1924, as amended, and under section 2 (c) of Public Law 774, as amended, as a displaced person.

Order: It is directed that the appeal be and the same is hereby sustained, the appellant to be admitted in accordance with the foregoing opinion if otherwise admissible.

Editor's note. Similar conclusion by B. I. A. in unreported Matter of AA-7283185, April 13, 1951, which involved Service in the Soviet Army from October 1918 until his capture at Stalingrad during July or August 1942 by an alien applying for admission as a displaced person.