But the rule eased somewhat, and the citation on the bottom simply means that if a copy is used for unlawful purposes, you're in trouble. One can routinely copy a Naturalization Certificate for including with USCIS petitions, etc. When applying for a U.S. passport, the Post Office will insist on your submitting the original of the Naturalization Certificate. I suspect, however, that a USCIS-certified "true copy" of the Certificate would be acceptable for Post Office passport-application purposes, but I've never seen it tested.
Sorry Ray, but your statement above seems fuzzy. I think tho that you are in agreement that a person is fine to send a photocopy in this case. We are referring here to photocopying for the sake of applying for retention of Philippine citizenship; one of the requirements there is a photocopy of the naturalization certificate. I see nothing in the statute that would disallow this, the closest that I can find:
Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 25 years (if the offense was committed to facilitate an act of international terrorism (as defined in section 2331 of this title)), 20 years (if the offense was committed to facilitate a drug trafficking crime (as defined in section 929 (a) of this title)), 10 years (in the case of the first or second such offense, if the offense was not committed to facilitate such an act of international terrorism or a drug trafficking crime), or 15 years (in the case of any other offense), or both.
When submitting for a U.S. passport, the Naturalization Certificate will be returned to the applicant with the passport. I am not sure if one could be assured of the same thing when filing for retention/reaquision of citizenship.
If there was a problem with making photocopies then places like the following would have big problems: http://www.time-pass...on-records.html
There is a huge number of sites that supply such for doing geneological research.
Also, the same general prohibition against photocopying applies to passports. Yet each USCIS specifically requests photocopies in various circumstances. I would think that the legal assumption is that photocopying is permitted for legitimate uses.
My 'fuzzy' statement was in regards to "lawful authority" to copy in general, including copying documents that have statutory "photocopy bans".