After the end of Roe v Wade, do you really want these nine justices, all of whom iirc said Roe v Wade is the settled law of the land, to decide whether you are a citizen?
Remember that the prosecution says anything no matter how trivial can be used to revoke citizenship.
Does your HN username count as a nickname? Prosecution might say yes. And again this isn't about you or me. It is the same thing as dragnet surveillance. I don't matter but somewhere in our nation or beyond the next MLK or the next great activist will be born and I want them to be able to develop and achieve their goals without being caught up in gotchas.
It is for that person probably not yet born that I don't want a two tiered citizenship system.
Context from the New York Times
Justice Sonia Sotomayor asked about the failure to disclose an embarrassing childhood nickname. Justice Elena Kagan said she was a “little bit horrified to know that every time I lie about my weight it has those kinds of consequences.”
Mr. Parker said the law applied to all false statements, even trivial ones.
Justice Stephen G. Breyer said it was “rather surprising that the government of the United States thinks” that the naturalization laws should be “interpreted in a way that would throw into doubt the citizenship of vast percentages of all naturalized citizens.”
Chief Justice Roberts added that the government’s position would give prosecutors extraordinary power. “If you take the position that not answering about the speeding ticket or the nickname is enough to subject that person to denaturalization,” he said, “the government will have the opportunity to denaturalize anyone they want.”
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/26/us/politics/supreme-court...