Case 1:19-cv-02090-EGS Document 1 Filed 07/15/19 Page 1 of 19

CHARLES D. SWIFT (D.C. ID No. 987353)

cswift@clcma.org
CHRISTINA A. JUMP (D.C. ID No. TX151)
cjump@clcma.org
Constitutional Law Center for Muslims in America (CLCMA)
833 E. Arapaho Rd., Ste. 102
Richardson, TX 75081
Tel: (972) 914-2507; Fax: (972) 692-7454

Attorneys for Plaintiff

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT

COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

MOHAMMED SABRA, as next friend of Cause No. 1:19-cv-2090

Baby M.
5451 N. Gates Ave. No 128
Fresno, CA 93722
CIVIL ACTION
Plaintiff/Petitioner,
vs.

Michael Pompeo, in his official capacity as

Secretary of the Department of State, whose
official address is 2201 C St., NW
Washington, DC 20520;

Defendant/Respondent.

COMPLAINT FOR
EMERGENCY RELIEF AND PETITION FOR MANDAMUS

Plaintiff Mohammed Sabra, as next friend of his infant daughter Baby M, by and through the

and through undersigned counsel, files this Complaint for Emergency Declaratory Relief and

Injunctive Relief, and Petition for Mandamus, against Michael Pompeo, in his official capacity as
 Case 1:19-cv-02090-EGS Document 1 Filed 07/15/19 Page 2 of 19

Secretary of the Department of State. This Complaint is supported by the following factual

background and claims for relief:

I. RELIEF SOUGHT

1. Mohammed Sabra (hereinafter “Plaintiff” or “Father Sabra”), as next friend of Baby M,

seeks declaratory, injunctive and mandamus relief recognizing Baby M as his daughter, and

therefore that she is immediately eligible for U.S. citizenship, through her two U.S. citizen parents.

Plaintiff seeks mandamus relief by way of Court order, as the Department of State has failed to apply

the proper preponderance of the evidence standard in evaluating the parent-child relationship between

Plaintiff and Baby M; Plaintiff has provided substantial documentation to the Department of State,

through the U.S. Embassy in Jerusalem, which more than meets the standards articulated by the relevant

regulations and legal standard in this matter. Rather than applying the appropriate standard,

Defendant appears to be requiring these parents to establish a biological relationship beyond all doubt,

at risk to the minor child. Plaintiff further seeks an Order instructing the Department of State to issue a

Consular Report of Birth Abroad (hereinafter “CRBA”) and a U.S. passport to Baby M, to enable her to

travel to the United States and receive the urgent medical care she requires. Finally, Plaintiff seeks

injunctive relief prohibiting the U.S. Department of State from requiring, or placing Baby M’s

application on hold pending, an unnecessary and time-consuming DNA test, which will further

delay Baby M’s application for a CRBA, and place the child’s life at risk due to travel. In order to

protect Plaintiff’s rights to privacy, Plaintiff requests the right to properly redact highly personal

documents filed in this matter, and to file under seal where possible and as necessary.
II. PARTIES

2. Plaintiff Mohammed Sabra is a naturalized United States citizen living in the United States and

domiciled in the state of California. He is the biological father of Baby M. He is also the husband

of Ponn Sabra (“Mother Sabra”), who is the biological mother of Baby M.

2
 Case 1:19-cv-02090-EGS Document 1 Filed 07/15/19 Page 3 of 19

3. Baby M is immediately eligible for U.S. citizenship as a result of the citizenship status of

both her father, Plaintiff Mohammed Sabra, and her mother. Baby M is currently residing with her

mother in Gaza. Her interests in this matter are represented by her father, as next friend.1

4. Defendant Michael Pompeo is sued in his official capacity, as Secretary of the Department

of State.

III. NEXT FRIEND STATUS

5. Next friend status on behalf of Baby M is appropriate because the child is an infant, born

on 2019, and accordingly does not have capacity to represent her own legal interests in this

matter. Furthermore, her father is present in the United States and therefore more readily available

to provide information and responses as needed in this proceeding.

6. Plaintiff Mohammed Sabra is an appropriate next friend to his daughter Baby M, because

his interest in having his daughter’s citizenship acknowledged, and the appropriate citizenship

documents issued, in order to enable her travel to the U.S. to receive the emergency medical

treatment she requires, is in alignment with the best interests of the child.

IV. JURISDICTION

7. The District Court for the District of Columbia has subject matter jurisdiction over this

action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331, which states that “the district courts shall have original

jurisdiction of all civil actions arising under the Constitution, laws or treaties of the United States.”

1 Baby M’s biological mother Ponn Sabra (“Mother Sabra”) is a birthright U.S. citizen, born and
raised in Connecticut, and most recently previously domiciled in California with Plaintiff
Mohammed Sabra.

3
 Case 1:19-cv-02090-EGS Document 1 Filed 07/15/19 Page 4 of 19

8. This Court has jurisdiction under the authority of 28 U.S.C. § 1361 (action in the nature of

mandamus). Jurisdiction is also appropriate by way of the relief sought under 28 U.S.C. § 2201 –

2202 (Declaratory Judgment Act), which enables parties to bring lawsuits in federal court to obtain

declaratory relief not otherwise available.

9. Expedited consideration is appropriate in this matter pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil

Procedure 57, because Baby M is suffering from serious medical needs that mandate urgent

medical treatments; pursuant to the Declaration from Baby M’s treating medical doctor, she is at

“extreme risk” and in immediate need of additional care not currently available for her in Gaza.

V. EXPEDITED RELIEF

10. This Complaint for Emergency Declaratory Judgment and Petition for Writ of Mandamus

requests that the United States recognize the parent-child relationship between Plaintiff, Baby M,

and Mother Sabra, and accordingly grant Baby M a CRBA and a U.S. passport on the basis of her

immediate eligibility for U.S. citizenship.

11. Expedited relief is appropriate in this case because Baby M is suffering from serious

medical issues placing her life at “extreme risk” and mandating immediate life-saving procedures

that are not available in Gaza.2

12. Plaintiff has provided the U.S. Embassy in Jerusalem with multiple forms of documentary

evidence establishing the biological parent-child relationship between himself and Baby M, as well

as between Baby M and Mother Sabra; however, the Embassy continues to request a DNA test, to

establish the biological relationship. The results of a DNA test, even if it were appropriate to

require or place her application on hold pending one, take at least 30 days. The 30-day estimate

does not take into account the additional time that will be involved with either transporting Baby

2 See Exhibit A, sealed Declaration of her treating medical doctor, for further details.

4
 Case 1:19-cv-02090-EGS Document 1 Filed 07/15/19 Page 5 of 19

M to a physician who can administer a DNA test, or bringing a physician to Baby M’s current

medical facility (an option which the Department of State’s prior responses renders beyond

consideration). And, as discussed below, transporting Baby M to a different medical facility for a

DNA test is not medically advisable for her in light of her fragile condition.

13. Baby M has a poor prognosis of survival currently, unless she receives urgent medical

treatment that is not available in Gaza. Accordingly, there is not sufficient time for Plaintiff to

submit to and await the results of a DNA test prior to the relief Plaintiff seeks, or his daughter’s

condition will likely drastically worsen. The information that Plaintiff has already provided to the

U.S. Department of State, through its Embassy in Jerusalem, is more than sufficient to establish

the parent-child relationship for citizenship purposes; there is no legitimate basis for requesting

additional proof, and in particular no justification for seeking a DNA test or further delay here.

VI. VENUE

14. Venue is proper in this Court under §1391(e)(1), which states in relevant part that “a civil

action in which a defendant is an officer or employee of the United States or an agency thereof

acting in his official capacity…may…be brought in any judicial district in which (A) a defendant

in the action resides.”

VII. STATEMENT OF FACTS

15. Mother Sabra is a United States citizen who was born in Connecticut on .

16. Plaintiff Mohammed Sabra is a naturalized U.S. citizen born in Gaza on .

17. Plaintiff and his wife Mother Sabra have been married since 1998, and have four daughters

together. Two of their daughters were born in the United States, and two, including Baby M, were

born in Gaza.

5
 Case 1:19-cv-02090-EGS Document 1 Filed 07/15/19 Page 6 of 19

18. Prior to becoming pregnant with Baby M, the Sabras were attempting to conceive a fourth

child, with the help of doctors in the U.S.

.3

19. In September 2018, Mother Sabra moved to Gaza, along with her three daughters, to enable

her eldest two daughters to attend University there. They recently completed their school year.

20. When Mother Sabra moved to Gaza in September 2018, she was unaware that she was

newly expecting another child. She discovered that she was pregnant after her September arrival

in Gaza.

21. Throughout her pregnancy, Mother Sabra did not have any ultrasound examinations.

As this was high risk pregnancy, she and her husband determined they would carry the baby to

term regardless of any risks that an ultrasound may have revealed, and therefore decided to opt out

of having ultrasounds.

22. Baby M was born on .4

23. At the time of her birth, Baby M was immediately eligible for United States citizenship by

virtue of her parents’ citizenship status.5

24. Shortly after her birth, Plaintiff and his wife discovered that Baby M was suffering from

several life-threatening health conditions.6

25. Baby M is currently being treated at hospital in Gaza; however, the facility where

Baby M is currently located does not have the resources or equipment to properly provide for her

3 See Exhibit B, sealed medical records of Mother Sabra.

4 ExhibitC, birth certificate of Baby M, with English translation.
5 See 8 USCS § 1401: Finding that the following category of persons are citizens at birth: “A person

born outside of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents both of whom are citizens
of the United States and one of whom has had a residence in the United States or one of its outlying
possessions prior to the birth of such person.”
6 See Exhibit A, sealed Declaration of medical doctor.

6
 Case 1:19-cv-02090-EGS Document 1 Filed 07/15/19 Page 7 of 19

medical needs, nor is it readily available elsewhere in Gaza.7 In addition to the Declaration of her

treating medical doctor attached and already provided to the Department of State, upon information

and belief Defendant has also confirmed this information with the doctor directly.

26. Baby M’s doctors strongly recommend her for immediate medical transport to a country

with facilities better suited to meet her urgent medical needs.8

27. Further, her doctors do not recommend that Baby M be relocated more times than is

absolutely necessary, due to her fragile condition at this time.

28. Her doctors have warned that without urgent medical care, her health is at “extreme risk.”9

29. At the time of her birth, Baby M was immediately eligible for United States citizenship by

virtue of her parents’ citizenship status.10 Accordingly, upon discovering their daughter’s health

conditions, her parents took immediate action to arrange for her transport to the U.S.

30. On June 11, 2019, Mother Sabra contacted the U.S. Embassy in Jerusalem (hereinafter “the

Embassy”); the Embassy in Jerusalem is the appropriate Embassy for individuals residing in Gaza.

Due to limited civilian mobility in and out of Gaza, she was only able to contact the Embassy via

e-mail.

31. Through the Embassy, Mother Sabra applied for emergency services for expedited

processing to obtain a CRBA and U.S. passport for Baby M, in order to allow the mother and child

to travel to the U.S. for necessary medical treatment.11

7 Id.
8 Id.
9 Id.
10 See fn. 5, supra.
11 Exhibit D, Receipt for Application.

7
 Case 1:19-cv-02090-EGS Document 1 Filed 07/15/19 Page 8 of 19

32. Mother Sabra received a phone call from the Embassy the day after she initiated contact

via e-mail, and she was able to explain the situation with her daughter’s health, and the need for

expedited relief.

33. Following Mother Sabra’s phone conversations with the Embassy, the Embassy listed her

application as “pending,” with Vice Consul Joshua Woda adding a handwritten notation that

“proof of biological relationship” was needed, and further instructing “we suggest DNA.”12 Vice

Consul Woda indicated to Mother Sabra during this conversation that a DNA test generally takes

at least 30-days to fully process and return results.

34. Plaintiff and his wife had at this point already submitted significant documentation proving

the parent-child relationship between themselves and Baby M, including providing the following:

a Palestinian birth certificate listing the child’s name, and both parent’s names; 13 the hospital’s

discharge papers showing the names of the infant and both parents;14

;15 and information showing

that Baby M has been registered on her father’s Palestinian national identification card (hawiya),

as his daughter.16

35. The reason for this request for additional proof of the biological parent-child relationship

appears to be the Embassy’s unfounded, and as yet unidentified, doubt about the biological

relationship between Baby M and her parents.17 Defendant states no reason for this speculative

doubt; upon information and belief, Plaintiff believes it is due to national origin and/or religion.

12 Exhibit E, Pending status documentation.

13 Exhibit C.
14 Exhibit F.
15 Exhibit B.
16 Exhibit G, email correspondence; see also Exhibit F, listing Baby M under her father’s

hawiya number.
17 Exhibit E.

8
 Case 1:19-cv-02090-EGS Document 1 Filed 07/15/19 Page 9 of 19

36. Based on Vice Consul Woda’s instruction, the Embassy informed Plaintiff’s wife, Mother

Sabra, that a DNA test would be necessary in order to confirm the biological relationship between

Baby M and Mother Sabra.18

37. According to the information provided to Mother Sabra, a DNA test will take at least 30

days to process and return results to the Embassy.

38. Mother Sabra urgently pleaded for assistance, informing Vice Consul Woda that, based on

the information given to her by her doctors, Baby M’s health is at extreme risk, and she cannot

physically withstand a trip to the Embassy for a DNA sample, or the 30-day subsequent wait

period for results from the test. Plaintiff and his wife have since conveyed to Defendant that, in

addition to their medical and privacy concerns, they oppose a DNA test for religious reasons.

39. Baby M’s doctor has determined that she should not be transported or relocated more times

than is absolutely necessary.19 A DNA test would require Baby M to travel to the Embassy, and

the physical demands of this trip would further jeopardize the stability of her health. This is

particularly true in light of the difficulties encountered by individuals attempting to enter and exit

Gaza. Although Plaintiff and his wife have been informed that the DNA test is technically “entirely

voluntary,” per the information sheet provided to Mother Sabra, it is the only thing delaying the

processing and approval of the application on behalf of Baby M.

40. Upon information and belief, the Embassy intends to keep Baby M’s application status as

“pending” until Baby M’s parents agree to submit to a DNA test, and await the results.

41. Mother Sabra tried again to prove her relationship to her infant daughter, bringing Vice

Consul Woda months of her own medical records from the months immediately prior to her arrival

18 Exhibit E.
19 Exhibit A.

9
 Case 1:19-cv-02090-EGS Document 1 Filed 07/15/19 Page 10 of 19

to Gaza. Mother Sabra provided these records in addition to the documentation already provided:

an official birth certificate identifying Plaintiff and his wife as Baby M’s biological parents,

discharge papers from the clinic where Baby M was born, which also identify Plaintiff and his

wife as Baby M’s biological parents, and which is also officially certified; and the previously

mentioned medical records of Mother Sabra

throughout 2018).20

42. In response to this additional documentation, the Embassy continued to “suggest” that

Plaintiff and his wife obtain a DNA test as the only acceptable means to process and complete

Baby M’s application.

43. Plaintiff Mohammed Sabra communicated via email with the Vice Consul as well on June

21, 2019, but received no better response.21 Vice Consul Woda continued his insistence on

additional prenatal medical records, despite the months of records already provided, as well as

pregnancy photos and ultrasounds. As Mother Sabra had already communicated to him and as

Plaintiff Mohammed Sabra reiterated, Baby M’s parents elected not to partake in ultrasounds, as

no results would have caused them to do anything differently, and the only photos taken during

Mother Sabra’s pregnancy are intimate family photographs which, for religious reasons, the family

is unwilling to provide as she is less than fully attired in these personal family moments.

44. On Tuesday June 25, 2019, Counsel for Plaintiff contacted the Embassy via e-mail,

informing it of their representation of Plaintiff, reiterating the time sensitive nature of Baby M’s

application, and urging the Embassy to consider the significant documentary evidence that has

20 Exhibits B, C, and F.
21 Exhibit G.

10
 Case 1:19-cv-02090-EGS Document 1 Filed 07/15/19 Page 11 of 19

already been provided. Counsel also renewed the religious objections of Plaintiff and his wife to

the requested actions.22

45. On Friday June 28, 2019, the American Citizen Services Unit for the U.S. Embassy in

Jerusalem responded, stating its position that “the documents submitted to date are not sufficient

to establish that a biological relationship exists … because they pertain to the period before Ms.

Sabra was pregnant and not to her pregnancy with [Baby M] or to [Baby M’s] birth.”23

46. Contrary to the Embassy’s stated position, Plaintiff and his wife have submitted the

hospital discharge papers and Baby M’s Palestinian birth certificate, both of which list Plaintiff

and Mother Sabra as the biological parents of Baby M.24 Both of these documents are also officially

certified by the relevant local authorities.

47. The Embassy’s June 28 communication further states that “as to [Baby M’s] medical care,

we restate our readiness to assist the family in requesting the Israeli government’s approval for

[Mother Sabra] and [Baby M’s] transfer to a hospital in Israel.” This position is wholly inconsistent

with the Embassy’s purported contention that it doubts the biological relationship between Mother

Sabra and Baby M, and therefore cannot issue the child a CRBA or U.S. passport. The U.S.

Supreme Court has held that “it would almost certainly be a tort as a matter of state law to operate

on an infant without parental consent;” accordingly, the Embassy’s offer to facilitate Mother Sabra

and Baby M’s transfer to a hospital for medical care constitutes an implicit recognition of Mother

Sabra’s authority to consent to medical care on behalf of Baby M, and therefore its recognition of

Baby M as Mother Sabra’s biological child. See Doe v. District of Columbia, 206 F. Supp. 3d 583,

22 Id.
23 Exhibit H.
24 Exhibits C, F.

11
 Case 1:19-cv-02090-EGS Document 1 Filed 07/15/19 Page 12 of 19

631 (D.D.C. 2016), citing Bowen v. Am. Hosp. Asso., 476 U.S. 610, 630, 106 S. Ct. 2101, 2114

(1986).

48. Counsel for Plaintiff responded to the Embassy’s June 28 communication by reiterating

that the Embassy has been in possession of both the hospital discharge record, issued and stamped

by the Palestinian National Authority and showing Mother Sabra and Plaintiff to be the biological

parents of Baby M, and Baby M’s official birth certificate (also certified as an official record, and

also identifying Plaintiff and Mother Sabra as Baby M’s biological parents). Counsel further

reminded the Embassy that, as it was previously informed, Baby M has been registered as

Plaintiff’s daughter on his Palestinian identification card, and Plaintiff provided his sworn Consent

for his wife to obtain a passport and CRBA for Baby M. Finally, Counsel additionally attached the

sworn Declaration the medical doctor treating Baby M at Hospital

in Gaza. This Declaration describes Baby M’s medical concerns and her need for immediate

medical care which is not currently available to her.25 Plaintiff learned later, upon information

and belief, that Embassy personnel spoke with ; in doing so, they learned that not

only did he verify what is in his Declaration, but he confirmed he is the doctor who delivered

Baby M, and therefore knows Mother Sabra to be her biological mother.

49. “Applicants for U.S. passports and Consular Reports of the Birth Abroad of a Citizen of

the United States have the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence, their identity

and that they are citizens of the United States;” this standard requires only that the Plaintiff show

“there is a greater than 50 percent chance that the proposition is true.”26 Baby M’s parents clearly

satisfied this burden in demonstrating their biological relationship with Baby M.

A, Declaration of medical provider; Exhibit I, June 28, 2019 email of counsel; Exhibit
25 Exhibit

K, Consent by Mohammed Sabra; Exhibit J, July 8, 2019 email of counsel.

26 8 FAM 304.2-2: Burden of Proof for Establishing U.S. Citizenship and DNA Testing.

12
 Case 1:19-cv-02090-EGS Document 1 Filed 07/15/19 Page 13 of 19

VIII. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF

a. Count 1: Plaintiff, On Behalf of His Minor Daughter, Seeks Declaratory Relief

Recognizing the Parent-Child Relationship Between Plaintiff, Baby M, and
Mother Sabra and Baby M’s Resulting Immediate Eligibility for U.S. Citizenship
and a U.S. Passport, in Accordance with Her Rights to Due Process Under the
Fifth Amendment.

50. Plaintiff incorporates by reference the allegations contained in the foregoing paragraphs.

51. Plaintiff, as next friend to Baby M, seeks a declaratory judgment that he and his wife have

sufficiently proven the biological relationship between themselves and Baby M;

52. Plaintiff therefore seeks further declaration by this Court that Baby M is immediately

eligible for U.S. citizenship.

53. The U.S. government’s own regulations state that “genetic testing is a useful tool for

verifying an alleged biological relationship when no other form of credible evidence is

available;” and “due to the expense, complexity, and logistical delays inherent in parentage

testing, genetic testing generally should be used only in the absence of sufficient other evidence

(documentation, photos, etc.) establishing the relationship.”27

54. In this case, Defendant has received the following credible evidence supporting the

biological relationship between Plaintiff and his wife, and Baby M:

a. Baby M’s official Palestinian birth certificate, listing both parent’s names as her biological

parents;28

b. The official discharge papers from Baby M’s birth, also listing Plaintiff and his wife as

Baby M’s biological parents;29

27 9FAM 601.11-1(B) Genetic (DNA) Testing (emphasis added); see also

https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/legal/travel-legal-considerations/us-citizenship/US-
Citizenship-DNA-Testing.html (last visited June 30, 2019).
28 Exhibit C.
29 Exhibit F.

13
 Case 1:19-cv-02090-EGS Document 1 Filed 07/15/19 Page 14 of 19

c. Prescription records showing

in the months leading up to her pregnancy with Baby M;30

d. The fact that Baby M has been registered at Mohammed Sabra’s daughter on his Palestinian

national identification card (hawiya); and

e. A Declaration from Baby M’s treating medical doctor, describing both the relationship

between Mother Sabra and Baby M, and Baby M’s immediate medical concerns and need for

urgent treatment, as well as his personal confirmation that he personally delivered Baby M.31

55. While DNA evidence is one acceptable method of proving the parent-child relationship in

the case of a U.S. citizen born abroad, it is not necessary or appropriately applied to the facts of

this case, particularly in light of the child’s immediate health issues, the substantial evidence

already provided by the parents, and the time required for DNA testing.

56. Although the burden of proving the parent-child relationship is on the applicant, the

Embassy is obligated to properly assess the evidence it receives and act in accordance with that

evidence. The Embassy is not free to substitute its own judgment for the incontrovertible proof of

the biological relationship between Plaintiff and his wife to Baby M that has already been provided.

57. In light of the proof of biological relationship provided by Plaintiff, Baby M is immediately

eligible for the U.S. citizenship and the rights and privileges that attend that citizenship;

accordingly, continued failure to provide her with a CRBA and U.S. passport constitutes a

violation of her fundamental rights to citizenship and travel under the Fifth Amendment to the U.S.

Constitution.

30 Exhibit B.
31 Exhibit A.

14
 Case 1:19-cv-02090-EGS Document 1 Filed 07/15/19 Page 15 of 19

b. Count 2: Plaintiff, on Behalf of His Minor Daughter, Seeks an Order of

Mandamus to Compel Defendant to Issue Baby M a Consular Report of Birth
Abroad, and U.S. Passport, and Enable Her to Travel to the U.S. For Necessary
Medical Treatment, in Accordance with the Proof of Parent-Child Relationship
Provided.

58. Plaintiff incorporates by reference the allegations contained in the foregoing paragraphs.

59. Plaintiff’s claim is clear: Baby M is immediately entitled to citizenship, based on the U.S.

citizenship of both of her parents; accordingly, she is also immediately eligible for a CRBA

recognizing that citizenship, as well as a U.S. passport. Plaintiff has more than satisfied the

requirement to provide proof of the parent-child relationship by a preponderance of the evidence;

accordingly, Defendant is not free to substitute the legally required standard of proof for an

unnecessarily heightened burden as is being presently required of Plaintiff.

60. Defendant has a duty to act; employees at U.S. embassies serve as the liaison between

individuals living abroad and U.S. governmental agencies.

61. While mandamus is generally thought of as a drastic remedy, it is properly available if:

“(1) the plaintiff has a clear right to relief; (2) the defendant has a clear duty to act; and (3) there

is no other adequate remedy available to plaintiff.”32 Plaintiff satisfies all three criteria, and the

request for a writ of mandamus is appropriate.

62. Plaintiff and his wife are the biological parents of an American citizen born abroad; thus,

they and Baby M have clear rights to have that citizenship recognized and the appropriate

documents issued. This is particularly true given the highly time-sensitive nature of this situation.

63. When a U.S. citizen child is born abroad, the parents must apply for a CRBA in order to

obtain a U.S. passport for their child, and have their child’s citizenship confirmed and

32 NorthernStates Power Co. v. U.S. Dep’t of Energy, 128 F.3d 754, 758 (D.C. Cir. 1997).
(quoting Council of and for the Blind of Delaware Cty. Valley, Inc. v. Regan, 709 F.2d 1521,
1533 (D.C. Cir. 1983) (en banc)).

15
 Case 1:19-cv-02090-EGS Document 1 Filed 07/15/19 Page 16 of 19

acknowledged. In order to obtain a CRBA, parents must submit documentation verifying the

parent-child relationship.

64. Defendant has a clear duty to act and process Baby M’s application where, as here, Plaintiff

and his wife have satisfied the legal requirement that they provide proof of their biological

relationship to Baby M.

65. Although consular officials must “use adjudicative logic and discretion” in order to “ensure

by the preponderance of the evidence” that the identity of the individual seeking a CRBA or

passport has been established, they also “must issue the passport application if the applicant is

entitled to the passport, has met the standard of evidence, the passport application is acceptable…,

and there are no other barriers to issuance.”33

66. Here, Plaintiff’s provision of an official birth certificate, discharge papers, Baby M’s

registration to Plaintiff’s Palestinian national ID, the Declaration of the treating medical doctor,

and the records of clearly satisfy the duty of

Plaintiff and his wife under a preponderance of the evidence standard.

67. Because Plaintiff and his wife have demonstrated Baby M’s entitlement to a CRBA and a

U.S. passport, the Department of State must issue one in accordance with the proof before it.

68. Finally, Plaintiff and his wife have no other adequate remedy to obtain a CRBA and U.S.

passport for their daughter, as those items are only issued by the Department of State.

69. Thus, a writ of mandamus is appropriate in this action.

33
8 FAM 103.1-4 “Identity Adjudication”; 8 FAM 103.1-1(c) “Responsibilities of the Passport
Specialist and Consular Officer” (emphasis added).

16
 Case 1:19-cv-02090-EGS Document 1 Filed 07/15/19 Page 17 of 19

c. Count 3: Plaintiff, on Behalf of His Minor Daughter, Seeks Injunctive Relief

Prohibiting Defendant from Refusing to Process Baby M’s Application Until it
Obtains a DNA Test and Results.

70. Plaintiff incorporates by reference the allegations contained in the foregoing paragraphs.

71. In order to prove their relationship to Baby M, Plaintiff and his wife have submitted their

child’s birth certificate, the discharge record from her birth, medical documentation of

, Baby M’s

presence on her father’s Palestinian national ID, and a Declaration from Baby M’s treating doctor.

72. Accordingly, Plaintiff and his wife provided more than enough evidence to satisfy the legal

requirement to establish the biological parent-child relationship between himself and his wife, and

Baby M, by a preponderance of the evidence.

73. In the absence of injunctive relief, Plaintiff and his daughter will suffer irreparable harm

as a result of the continued delay by Defendant in the issuance of Baby M’s CRBA and U.S.

passport.

74. Defendant’s insistence on a DNA test, despite the substantial evidence of the parent-child

relationship that has already been presented, places Baby M’s life in imminent danger. It is highly

likely that Baby M will not survive the minimum 30-day period of time that it will take to process

a DNA test and return the results.

75. Injunctive relief would not cause substantial injury Defendant or other interested parties in

this matter. Defendant does not have an interest in delaying or denying the citizenship rights of

U.S. citizen children born abroad.

76. The only legitimate interest that Defendant can assert in this matter is its interest in not

erroneously granting a CRBA to a child who is not actually eligible; however, the evidence already

17
 Case 1:19-cv-02090-EGS Document 1 Filed 07/15/19 Page 18 of 19

provided by Plaintiff and his wife more than suffices to satisfy Defendant’s inquiry into the parent-

child relationship in this instance.

77. Public interest is furthered by this Court granting injunctive relief preventing Defendant

from further delay of Baby M’s application pending submission to and the results of a DNA test.

The public has an interest in the U.S. adhering to standard procedures in assessing the parent-child

relationship for citizenship purposes; generally speaking, presenting an official birth certificate, as

well as other significant proof of birth, is sufficient. There is no reason to doubt the documentation

as presented in this case. The public further has an interest in the CRBA process being applied

equally, regardless of the location and/or religion of the parents in question.

d. Count 4: In the Alternative, Defendant Has Violated the Religious Freedom

Restoration Act.

78. In the alternative, Plaintiff submits that, because the law and relevant regulations require

Defendant to issue a CRBA and U.S. passport to Baby M, failure to do so constitutes a violation

of Plaintiff’s rights to free exercise of religion under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act

(“RFRA”). Significant portions of the unnecessary evidence requested by the Embassy, most

notably a DNA test and photos of Mother Sabra during pregnancy, conflict with Plaintiff and his

wife’s already articulated sincerely held religious beliefs. Continued insistence on the provision of

additional redundant evidence, requiring Plaintiff and his wife to choose between providing that

evidence or adhering to their sincerely held religious beliefs, violates RFRA. See 42 U.S.C.S. §

2000bb et seq.

18
 Case 1:19-cv-02090-EGS Document 1 Filed 07/15/19 Page 19 of 19

IX. CONCLUSION

For the reasons set forth above, Plaintiff hereby requests that this Court enter declaratory

judgment that he and Mother Sabra are the biological parents of Baby M, and that accordingly

Baby M is immediately eligible for U.S. citizenship. Plaintiff further seeks a Writ of Mandamus

compelling Defendant to issue Baby M both a CRBA and U.S. passport, enabling her to travel to

the U.S. for urgently needed medical treatment, in accordance with the proof provided of Baby

M’s biological relationship to her two U.S. citizen parents. Finally, Plaintiff seeks injunctive relief

prohibiting Defendant from unnecessarily delaying Baby M’s application, pending any submission

to or results of a DNA test. The documentation provided by Plaintiff and his wife, including an

official birth certificate and discharge records, each listing both parent’s names and birth dates and

identifying them as the biological parents of Baby M as well as testimony of the medical doctor

who both delivered and is treating Baby M, suffice to legally establish the parent-child relationship.

A DNA test is unnecessary, and requiring one in these circumstances not only violates Plaintiff’s

rights under the law, but also places his U.S. citizen infant daughter’s life in danger. Accordingly,

Plaintiff respectfully requests the Court grant his Complaint for Emergency Relief and his Petition

for Writ of Mandamus, and award the relief requested herein.

Respectfully submitted,
/s/ Christina A. Jump
Christina A. Jump
D.C. ID No. TX151
cjump@clcma.org
Charles D. Swift
D.C. ID No. 987353
cswift@clcma.org
Constitutional Law Center for
Muslims in America
833 E. Arapaho Rd, Suite 102
Richardson, TX 75081
Phone: (972) 914-2507
Fax: (972) 692-7454
19