A man [Dutch nationality] in my research marries in the Netherlands. The marriage gets dissolved (in 1935) by divorce. In 1943 he resides in the USA and gets married. He then declares he hasn’t been married before. He is nationalised in 1953 as USA citizen. So he has lied. I guess this isn’t uncommon. But would he have jeopardized his citizenship if he had been found out before applying?
When a person gets married in the Netherlands they have show all kind of documents. Including any previous marriages. Perhaps this wasn’t the case in the USA?
Declaring never being married, when they have been, on marriage licenses/certificates is not uncommon. How does a clerk demand to see a previous marriage and divorce certificate when the applicant says they never existed? I suppose with today’s technology it is less common with interconnected databases. But are state databases connected with other states? and between countries?
I am in Massachusetts, USA and there are 351 city and town clerks that issue marriage licenses and certificates. That information gets forwarded to the Secretary of the State. Divorces are handled by the courts. Are these databases, within the same state, talking to each other?
Can it cause problems if a person lies? Probably only in cases of revenge. In your scenario of the person’s second marriage in 1943 and subsequent citizenship, if that marriage ended in a nasty divorce and the wife knew of the earlier marriage and the lie, she could notify officials of the false declarations. Unknown what the results would be. If he has the divorce papers of the first marriage it would prove that the second marriage was not bigamous.
I do not know what current citizenship documents entail but those documents I have found from the early 1900’s for relatives only asked about the person’s current marital status. But with the current administration…
In our country since 1812 you have to submit, birth certificates for both parties, proofs of previous marriages when and how they ended, existing childs if they where legitimised at the same time of wedding. During 19th century often also parents from both sides, sometimes in special cases even grandparents. All is now computerised ofcourse. And things aren’t asked anymore (no more occupation, no more permissions of parents etc)
Now lies did happen probably, but I have only found one other before. (before 1812). Am researching since 1990. So they seem to be rare.
I asked Google 
and it says:
If he applied for and was granted naturalization in 1953, his case fell squarely under the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) of 1952 (also known as the McCarran-Walter Act), which went into effect on December 24, 1952. [1, 2]
Two primary statutory provisions within this specific 1952 law would have heavily jeopardized his citizenship if he had been caught: [1, 2]
1. The Statutory Bar for False Testimony
To naturalize, an applicant had to prove “good moral character”. The 1952 Act explicitly codified for the first time that lying under oath automatically destroyed “good moral character”. [1, 2]
The Law: 8 U.S.C. § 1101(f)(6) (Section 101(f)(6) of the INA of 1952) [1, 2]
“No person shall be regarded as, or found to be, a person of good moral character who, during the period for which good moral character is required to be established, is, or was— […] (6) one who has given false testimony for the purpose of obtaining any benefits under this Act.” [1, 2]
(Note: While the lie occurred on a 1943 state marriage certificate, he would have been asked to reaffirm his complete marital history under oath during his 1953 immigration interviews. Repeating the lie to the immigration examiner would constitute “false testimony” to gain a benefit). [1, 2]
2. The Mandate for Citizenship Revocation (Denaturalization)
If he managed to successfully slip through the interview process in 1953, but the government found out afterward that he had concealed his previous marriage, the law mandated that his citizenship be revoked because it was obtained fraudulently. [1]
The Law: 8 U.S.C. § 1451(a) (Section 340(a) of the INA of 1952) [1]
“It shall be the duty of the United States attorneys… to institute proceedings… for the purpose of revoking and setting aside the order admitting such person to citizenship and canceling the certificate of naturalization on the ground that such order and certificate of naturalization were illegally procured or were procured by concealment of a material fact or by willful misrepresentation…” [1]
What about his entry into the U.S.?
If he immigrated to the U.S. in the 1940s and lied on his original entry visa paperwork to hide the marriage, he would also have violated the Immigration Act of 1924 (the law governing visas at the time of his 1943 residency). Under that older law, procuring a visa through fraud or misrepresentation made the visa invalid, meaning he was technically “deportable” from the moment he entered the country. [1, 2, 3]
thank you George for your detailed answer.