Akron Law Review, Vol. 57 [2025], Iss. 1, Art. 2 62 AKRON LAW R EVIEW [57:49 birth would not be considered delayed in the state where it was registered. 74 Secondary evidence is that which is sufficient to establish to the satisfaction of the Department that he or she was born in the United States [such as] hospital birth certificates, baptismal certificates, medical and school records, certificates of circumcision, other documentary evidence created shortly after birth but generally not more than 5 years after birth, and/or affidavits of persons having personal knowledge of the facts of the birth. 75 While passport applications rely on similar forms of documentation as delayed birth registration, 76 passport regulations are more flexible and less prescriptive than most state birth registration statutes. 77 In many states, delayed birth registration processes require a registrant to present a minimum number of documents of specified kinds of documents established by a particular period. 78 Where a federal agency denies a person a right of citizenship, such as refusing to issue a passport for insufficient evidence of citizenship, the person can seek a declaratory judgment of their citizenship in federal court under 8 U.S.C. § 1503(a). 79 In theory, birth registration is not strictly 74. Id. 75. 22 C.F.R. § 51.42(b) (2007). In 1955, an article in the Columbia Law Review argued that state’s birth registration could not be “be held to be binding when the question of national citizenship is at issue,” and that “[i]ndependent state action in the field would seriously interfere with the constitutional requirement that such regulation be uniform.” Evidentiary Effect of Delayed Birth Certificate, 55 C OLUM. L. R EV. 565, 568 (1955) (citation omitted). State practice then and now shows significant ‘independent state action,’ as shown below in Part IV, but is not determinative of U.S. citizenship. 76. See Cobos v. Kerry, No. CIV.A. H-13-02897, 2015 WL 3965660, at *2 (S.D. Tex June 30, 2015) (stating that parents of a child obtained a delayed birth certificate in Texas, based on baptism certificates and affidavits from witnesses of birth); De La Cruz v. Clinton, No. A-11-CV-675-AWA, 2012 WL 1941373, at *3 (W.D. Tex. May 29, 2012) (assessing proffered evidence, including a delayed Texas birth certificate, a driver’s license, a baptismal certificate, and affidavits). 77. Compare 22 C.F.R. § 51.42(b) (2007) (requiring the applicant, if lacking a birth certificate issued within one year of birth, to “submit secondary evidence sufficient to establish to the satisfaction of the Department that he or she was born in the United States [including] hospital birth certificates , baptismal certificates, medical and school records, certificates of circumcision, other documentary evidence created shortly after birth but generally not more than 5 years after birth, and/or affidavits of persons having personal knowledge of the facts of the birth.”), with IOWA ADMIN. C ODE r. 64196.18(3) (2013); D.C. MUN. R EGS. tit. 29, § 2804 (1991); N.D. ADMIN. C ODE 33-04-06-06 (2008) (setting out requirements for Iowa, the District of Columbia, and North Dakota requiring two pieces of evidence to establish the facts of birth for registrations filed within seven years, and three pieces for registrations filed seven years or more after birth); MICH. ADMIN. C ODE r. 325.3220 (current as of Apr. 1, 2023) (allowing registration in Michigan with several combinations of documents). 78. See infra Part III.C. 79. 8 U.S.C. § 1503(a) (1996) (“If any person who is within the United States claims a right or privilege as a national of the United States and is denied such right or privilege by any department or independent agency, or official thereof, upon the ground that he is not a national of the United States, https://ideaexchange.uakron.edu/akronlawreview/vol57/iss1/2 14