Adquisición fuera del matrimonio en el extranjero (INA 309)

INA §309 = 8 USC §1409 governs whether and how a child born abroad and out of wedlock to a U.S.-citizen parent acquires citizenship at birth. The framework bifurcates by transmitting parent. A USC MOTHER transmits under §309(c) = 8 USC §1409(c): for out-of-wedlock births 24 Dec 1952 through 11 Jun 2017, the mother need only have been physically present in the U.S. (or outlying possessions) for a continuous period of one year at some point before the birth. A USC FATHER transmits under §309(a) = 8 USC §1409(a), which applies the §301 transmission requirements (including the §301(g) physical-presence test) AND four additional conditions designed to establish the parent-child bond. The provision exists because out-of-wedlock births historically raised proof-of-parentage and gender-equality questions that the in-wedlock §301 rule did not, and it remains among the most constitutionally contested descent provisions.

Good moral character is NOT an element of §309 acquisition; it is documented here only to prevent cross-route confusion. Citizenship acquired at birth by descent — even with the additional §309(a) parentage conditions for fathers — vests automatically and is not conditioned on good moral character, English/civics knowledge, an oath, or residence in the United States, all of which are NATURALIZATION requirements under INA §316 = 8 USC §1427 and §312 = 8 USC §1423 (US-NAT-01) that apply only to persons becoming citizens after birth. A §309 acquirer is a citizen from birth and cannot be denaturalized under §340 = 8 USC §1451 (which reaches only naturalized persons), though a fraudulently obtained CRBA or Certificate of Citizenship can be administratively cancelled — correcting the document without stripping a genuinely vested birth status.

The claimant proves §309 acquisition by a preponderance of the evidence (8 CFR §341.2). For a USC-MOTHER claim, the package establishes the mother's U.S. citizenship, the maternal parent-child relationship (the foreign birth certificate naming the mother, hospital/medical records), and her one year (pre-2017 births) or §301(g) quantum (post-2017 births) of physical presence. For a USC-FATHER claim, §309(a) demands MORE: clear-and-convincing evidence of the blood relationship (typically DNA testing where documentary proof is weak), proof the father was a U.S. national at birth, the written support agreement (or proof the father is deceased), AND proof of legitimation, a written sworn acknowledgment of paternity, or a court paternity adjudication completed before the child's 18th birthday. The legitimation/acknowledgment timing is jurisdictional — once the child turns 18 without it, the father can no longer transmit under §309(a). Note the asymmetry of standards: the blood relationship is clear-and-convincing, but the overall acquisition is preponderance.

The procedural tracks are: CONTEMPORANEOUS — the USC parent reports the out-of-wedlock birth at a U.S. embassy/consulate, submitting Form DS-2029 plus citizenship proof, parentage proof (DNA where needed for fathers), the §309(a) support/legitimation documents for fathers, and physical-presence evidence; the consular officer adjudicates and issues Form FS-240. RETROSPECTIVE — the claimant files Form N-600 with USCIS at any age (but note the §309(a) father-legitimation step must have been COMPLETED before the child turned 18, even if the N-600 is filed later); USCIS examines and issues a Certificate of Citizenship if the elements are met. A denied N-600 may be appealed to the AAO on Form I-290B, and a federal declaratory judgment of nationality lies under INA §360 = 8 USC §1503. There is no oath, residence, or naturalization step.

Government fees parallel US-DSC-01. The retrospective Form N-600 (Certificate of Citizenship) carries a USCIS filing fee of $1,385 for paper filing or $1,335 for online filing (the standard $50 online discount), effective 1 Apr 2024 under the USCIS 2024 Final Fee Rule (89 FR 6386, codified at 8 CFR §106.2; USCIS G-1055 schedule); no biometrics fee applies to N-600, and the fee is exempt for a current/former U.S. armed-forces member filing on their own behalf and for certain adopted children under INA §101(b)(1)(E)-(G). The contemporaneous CRBA is documented via Form DS-2029, which issues the FS-240 and carries a consular fee of $100 (a replacement or amended CRBA is $50), set by the DOS Schedule of Fees (22 CFR §22.1; travel.state.gov, updated 19 Mar 2026), as of 2026-06-01. The concurrent first minor passport (DS-11) carries, for a child under 16, a $100 application fee plus a $35 execution fee ($135 total); for an adult applicant aged 16+ the book is $130 application plus $35 execution ($165 total), with an optional $60 expedite fee, $22.05 for 1-3 day delivery, and a $150 file-search fee where applicable (22 CFR §22.1; travel.state.gov, as of 2026-06-01). The out-of-wedlock context can add private costs not set by the government — chiefly accredited DNA testing to satisfy the §309(a) clear-and-convincing blood-relationship standard for fathers, and any costs of obtaining a legitimation order. A §1503 federal action carries the standard civil filing fee plus litigation costs.

El estatuto operativo es INA §309, codificado en 8 USC §1409, promulgado con INA 1952 (Pub. L. 82-414, 66 Stat. 238) y operativo según enmendado mediante Pub. L. 119-21 (4 de julio de 2025). §309(a) = 8 USC §1409(a) establece las condiciones del USC-padre; §309(c) = 8 USC §1409(c) establece la regla de 1 año de la madre del USC. La estructura actual de cuatro condiciones del §309(a) fue reescrita por la Pub. L. 99-653 §13 (Enmiendas a la Ley de Inmigración y Nacionalidad de 1986, 100 Stat. 3657), con la disposición sobre la fecha de vigencia agregada por Pub. L. 100-525 §8(r) (1988): evidencia clara y convincente del parentesco consanguíneo; la nacionalidad estadounidense del padre al nacer el niño; un acuerdo escrito (a menos que haya fallecido) para brindar apoyo financiero hasta los 18 años; y legitimación, reconocimiento escrito bajo juramento o adjudicación judicial de paternidad antes de los 18 años. §309 opera por referencia a §301 = 8 USC §1401, por lo que la cantidad de presencia física del padre es la cifra de §301(g) fijada en la época, no un número de §309 separado.

Review of an adverse §309 determination tracks the descent framework: a denied Form N-600 may be appealed to the USCIS Administrative Appeals Office on Form I-290B, and a person within the United States may bring a de novo declaratory-judgment action under INA §360 = 8 USC §1503(a) (cross-referenced to 28 USC §2201), subject to a 5-year limitations period from the final administrative denial; a person abroad proceeds under §1503(b)-(c). §309 cases have produced the country's leading citizenship-equality litigation — Miller (1998), Nguyen (2001), and Morales-Santana (2017) all reached the Supreme Court — so the constitutional dimension is unusually live. A claimant whose paternal claim failed only on the gender-differential physical-presence point for a pre-2017 birth should note Morales-Santana's prospective-only remedy: it does NOT retroactively validate pre-2017 paternal claims that failed the longer quantum. Where a child seeks to litigate a parent's equal-protection theory, the Miller jus tertii standing obstacle (per O'Connor/Kennedy) must be anticipated.

Several exceptions and limits operate. CONSTRUCTIVE PHYSICAL PRESENCE: the §301(g) physical-presence credit for the parent's honorable U.S. military, U.S.-government, or qualifying international-organization service abroad applies to §309 fathers (and post-2017 mothers) because §309 incorporates §301. DECEASED FATHER: the §309(a)(3) written-support-agreement condition is excused where the father has died, though the blood-relationship and pre-18 legitimation/acknowledgment conditions still apply. PRE-18 TIMING: the legitimation/acknowledgment/paternity-adjudication condition is a hard, jurisdictional deadline at the child's 18th birthday — there is no discretionary extension. NO LEVELING-DOWN: post-12-Jun-2017 unwed mothers cannot claim the old 1-year rule, because Morales-Santana leveled up; this 'exemption' was eliminated prospectively, a counter-intuitive but load-bearing point. There is NO equitable waiver of a genuine physical-presence shortfall — the §301(g) quantum imported by §309 is jurisdictional.