I’ve been doing some research for a legal issue on a subject that isn’t usually too much interest to most readers here … US personal security clearances. But I’ve come across some issues that really opened my eyes … I’ve been working with government security clearances for years, and I thought I knew a lot of the answers, but a lot of rules have changed, so I thought I would toss a little of this information out for discussion.
Remember, I am not a lawyer, (I don’t even play one on TV) and if you have any issues, or even thing you might have any issues, you need a lawyer. And you need a specialist lawyer who deals in security clearances … most of the rules in this business aren’t taught in law school, and they have changed a lot in the past few years so make sure you deal with a security clearance lawyer who actually stays current.
One thing that amazed me in my current research are the vast number of US jobs that now require a security clearance. It’s not just people in the military or the nuclear industry or some esoteric work area like that. Vast numbers of relatively mundane US jobs now require national security clearances. And vast numbers get turned down every year.
I held several levels of security clearances for the mid 1960’s until 2003, and for the average guy or gal, there wasn’t that much to it. If you stayed away from drugs, didn’t commit any crimes, reported foreign travel and generally followed the rules, no problem.
Today? Some big problems, especially with what the books call “foreign preference”.
Paragraph 6 of the new adjudicative guidelines sets out the security concern relating to Foreign Influence: “Foreign contacts and interests may be a security concern if the individual has divided loyalties or foreign interests, may be manipulated or induced to help a foreign person, group, organization, or government in a way that is not in U.S. interests, or is vulnerable to pressure or coercion by a foreign interest.”
photo credit: eisenbahner
People with “significant others” from overseas are looked at with a very high level of scrutiny. and after just having read through more than one hundred case transcripts that involved appeals of folks denied their clearances because of alleged “foreign preference”, my layman’s opinion of the way the law is applied is, it’s going to be a big surprise to someone who gets themselves in this position.
The government does not have to prove any sort of wrong doing ‘beyond a reasonable doubt’, as they would have to in any sort of criminal trial. They only have to show ‘substantial’ evidence, which in the law’s own definition is “More than a scintilla” (which means not much at all).
Also, the regs regarding security clearances are essentially backwards compared with our usual laws. You are guilty until you an prove yourself innocent … once a government investigator alleges wrong doing, with even a ‘scintilla” of evidence, it’s up to the applicant to prove the government wrong. Not an easy task.
In particular the cases I have just been looking at regarding “foreign preference” and denied clearances (which usually men “no job” for you) that turned out badly for the applicant involved owning property or having bank accounts in a foreign country, and cohabitating with someone in a foreign country who is already married.
Sorry to have to say this, but in the 10 years or so that I have been intimately involved with folks wanting to move to the Philippines, I would have to say a huge number have been guys who met a girl from the Philippines and have decided to come to the Philippines and live with her.
We’ve discussed before that in some cases this can get you in big trouble under Philippine law … now I see this can be a big problem under US law too, if a security clearance ever becomes part of your life.
If you think you need a security clearance attorney, better get one. Here’s a comment I saw numerous times in transcripts of appeals where guys and gals who tried to handle their own cases and didn’t like the outcome… :
The record provides no reason to doubt that Applicant’s decision to represent himself was knowing and intelligent. Having chosen to represent himself, Applicant cannot complain about the quality of his self-representation.
This is a modern, politically correct way of saying, “He who acts as his own lawyer has a fool for a client”. So if you need a security clearance for you current job … or you think you might ever need one in your future career, better learn the rules.
Popularity: 2% [?]
