[the_Watchman]

Obtaining citizenship should be treated like a contract. If it can be determined that the contract was entered into fraudulently, then it should be null and void.

Thus, the only question before the court should be whether she would have been able to obtain citizenship if she had not concealed her husband’s prior activities. If that would have precluded her from acquiring citizenship, then Robert’s is wrong to trivialize the concealment.
[I am NOT a lawyer. I am an engineer.]

[AndyJackson]

the only question before the court should be whether she would have been able to obtain citizenship if she had not concealed her husband’s prior activities

But that wasn't the government's position. The government's position is that the misrepresented fact was enough and the determination of effect on citizenship was irrelevant. THAT is not a reasoned exercise of administrative discretion.

[Batman11]

PFL