The Getting and Granting of Citizenship: Examining the Inequalities of Naturalization Policy Implementation involving Discretion

The institution of citizenship promises complete equality to those holding it. For many migrants, holding formal membership of the citizenry they moved into is the final step on a journey towards inclusion. Based on 15 semi-structured interviews with new German citizens as well as 9 interviews utilizing ‘real-life’ vignettes (Sampson and Johannessen, 2020) with case workers evaluating citizenship applications, this paper explores the impact of discretionary power and the perception thereof by migrants on the naturalization process. Making use of a bottom-up approach in the analysis of citizenship policy implementation, I identify where bureaucrats have to make use of their discretion and how they wield this power. The interviews with new German citizens add the rare perspective of those depending on the outcome of bureaucratic decision making. The perception of discretion is seldom centered in studies of policy implementation, especially regarding immigration and citizenship policy (Bartels, 2013; Goodsell, 1981). This paper thus offers a unique glimpse at both sides of the naturalization process. Both sets of interviews are connected through ‘real-life’ vignettes based on the experiences of the new German citizens, which citizenship caseworkers were asked to react to. Using the thematic analysis of these 24 interviews, I find that due to a lack of clear implementation guidelines imposed from above, caseworkers are using their discretionary power not just to decide between alternative outcomes, but also to create their own guidelines for the implementation of citizenship policy. Most of these protocols are created on a departmental level while some are established by individual caseworkers. At the same time, citizenship applicants and their respective case workers have very different experiences of how much discretion is granted to bureaucrats. Future citizens feel entirely at the mercy of their caseworkers while the latter see themselves moving within clearly demarcated spaces of discretion. Following Crossley’s (2022) relational sociology, it becomes apparent that intense workloads burdening caseworkers and past negative interactions with other bureaucrats priming citizenship applicants negatively make for a potentially tension-filled relationship where ensuring equal treatment of applications is impeded.