Case Story

I’m a U.S. Citizen — So Why Can My Son Get His Papers but Not My Daughter?

When a U.S.-citizen mother comes to us on behalf of her teenage children, the last thing she expects to hear is that the law treats her two kids differently from each other — and that the daughter who waited too long has missed a window that the younger son can still reach.

The Family

Chloé — U.S. citizen, born in Montreal to one Canadian parent and one American parent, has spent her adult life splitting time between Montreal and New York

Marc — Chloé’s long-term partner and the father of both children, Canadian citizen, based in Montreal

Charlotte — Chloé and Marc’s daughter, 19 years old, born in Montreal, has always traveled to the US on her Canadian passport

Julien — Chloé and Marc’s son, 16 years old, born in Montreal, also has always traveled to the US on his Canadian passport

The family came to us because Charlotte and Julien had always crossed the border on their Canadian passports without issue — but as Charlotte was planning next steps that would take her to the United States for school, the family decided it was time to get their American papers in order. What they found caught them off guard and sent them to quickly find another solution.

The Rule No One Told Them About

When a child is born abroad to a U.S.-citizen parent who was never married to the other parent, citizenship doesn’t transmit automatically just because the parent is American. The citizen parent must meet a physical presence requirement — time actually spent living in the United States — before the child’s birth. In the case of a U.S.-citizen mother, the rule that applied when Charlotte and Julien were born required her to have been physically present in the United States for one continuous, uninterrupted year at some point in her life before the child was born.

Chloé had never done that. She had spent years moving between Montreal and New York — enough cumulative time in the United States to fill many years over — but she had never once stayed for a single unbroken stretch of twelve months. She always went back to Montreal. And that pattern, repeated throughout her adult life, meant the one-year continuous presence requirement was never satisfied.

Speak to a lawyer for more details about how physical presence is counted and what documentation is typically used to establish it.

Why Only Chloé’s History Matters — and the Morales-Santana Wrinkle

Because Marc is not a U.S. citizen, the law looks only at Chloé’s history. His years as a present, committed father — the family lives together in Montreal — play no role in the citizenship analysis. If both parents had been U.S. citizens but unmarried, both of their records would be considered. But with only one citizen parent, the entire case rests on her.

Here is where the 2017 Supreme Court decision in Sessions v. Morales-Santana adds a painful irony. Before that decision, an unmarried U.S.-citizen mother needed to show one uninterrupted year of physical presence in the United States before the child’s birth. After Morales-Santana equalized the standard across parents, the requirement became five total years — cumulative, not continuous — with two of those years after age fourteen.

Chloé easily meets the five-year cumulative standard. Her years of splitting time between Montreal and New York add up to far more than five years in total. Had Charlotte been born after Morales-Santana, that cumulative history would have been enough to transmit citizenship. But because Charlotte was born before the decision, the older one-year continuous standard still governs her case — and that is the standard Chloé could not meet. The rule that was meant to be easier for mothers turned out, in this family’s specific circumstances, to be the harder one.

Speak to a lawyer for more details about how the Morales-Santana decision affects cases depending on when a child was born.

Why Charlotte’s Door Has Closed

Charlotte is 19. The path to citizenship through her mother at birth is closed, for the reason above. And the alternative path — Form N-600K, which allows a U.S.-citizen parent to apply for citizenship on behalf of a child living abroad — has a hard age cutoff of 18. Charlotte aged out before the family realized any of this was an issue.

This is one of the most painful outcomes we encounter in our practice: a child who was likely always going to face a difficult case, but who might have had options at 16 or 17 that simply do not exist at 19.

Speak to a lawyer as early as possible if you have children approaching their teenage years who have not yet documented any U.S. citizenship claim.

Why Julien’s Door Is Still Open

At 16, Julien is in a different position entirely — and this is where the story turns. N-600K does not use the same one-year continuous presence rule that blocked Charlotte’s at-birth claim. Instead, it asks whether the U.S.-citizen parent has been physically present in the United States for a total of five years at any point in her life, with at least two of those years coming after she turned fourteen.

Chloé, who has spent years moving between Montreal and New York, easily satisfies that cumulative standard. The time she spent in New York — none of it constituting one continuous year, but collectively far more than five years — counts in full for N-600K purposes, even though it did nothing for Charlotte’s at-birth analysis.

In other words: the very lifestyle that cost Charlotte her claim is precisely what makes Julien eligible — because N-600K measures differently.

Speak to a lawyer for more details about the physical presence documentation required for an N-600K application on a parent’s behalf.

Charlotte’s Path Now: The Student Visa

Charlotte’s citizenship window has closed, but her ability to build a life in the United States has not. As a young Canadian citizen who wants to pursue studies in the U.S., she is eligible for an F-1 student visa — and a student visa can be the beginning of a longer path toward U.S. residency and eventually citizenship through other channels, depending on how her plans evolve.

Depending on the career she pursues, Charlotte may also qualify for a TN-1 visa. Available to Canadian citizens under the USMCA, the TN-1 allows professionals in designated fields — including engineers, accountants, scientists, lawyers, and a range of others — to work in the United States without going through the H-1B lottery. For a young Canadian with the right professional background, it is one of the more accessible and renewable pathways to living and working in the U.S. long-term.

It is not the outcome the family came to us hoping for. But it is a real path forward, and understanding it clearly is better than spending years under the mistaken belief that citizenship is still somehow available.

Speak to a lawyer for more details about Charlotte’s options and how to think about her long-term immigration path alongside Julien’s N-600K process.

Key Takeaway

Having a U.S.-citizen parent is not always enough. The physical presence that parent accumulated in the United States — how much, how it was structured, and whether it was continuous or cumulative — determines which children qualify and through which process. When a family waits until the children are teenagers to sort this out, the difference between 16 and 19 can be the difference between two options and zero. If you are a U.S. citizen living abroad with children who have not yet documented their citizenship status, the time to act is before they turn 18.

Speak to a lawyer for more details and a full review of your family’s specific facts before relying on general information like this article.

Based on a real case. Names have been changed to protect client privacy. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.