In the first trial, the Minister of Justice Felix Braz differentiated between two twins in a naturalised citizenship case as one of the twins did not have a biological relation to his father.
In August 2016, the father of the twins was granted Luxembourgish citizenship in accordance with the 2008 legislation on naturalisation. The father then requested citizenship for his two underage children. As the man is married to another man, the now three-year-old twins were born in California through a surrogate mother.
In May 2017, Braz granted one of the twins Luxembourgish citizenship, but refused to grant the other Luxembourgish citizenship. Braz justified the move as a DNA test revealed that the Luxembourgish father was not the biological father of the second twin.
In June 2015, a court ruling in the California state court acknowledged both men as the parents of the twins. In January 2018, the parents took the issue to the Luxembourgish administrative court
The first judge of the administrative court has remained by the ruling that the new citizenship legislation of 2017 should apply to the case, rather than the 2008 legislation. In particular, the parents are basing their claim on article 2 of the new legislation to prove that their son is eligible for citizenship.
The men were adamant that it was wrong for the ministry to base its judgement on an article from the 2008 law rather than the updated law. Braz refused to grant the child Luxembourgish citizenship as his Luxembourgish father was not seen as the biological father and consequently not seen as a parent of the child. However, the US authorities acknowledged both fathers as parents in the child's birth certificate. Braz concluded that the information in the birth certificate did not correspond to real events in light of the DNA test.
The administrative court highlighted that article 2 of the 2017 citizenship law applies to all minors with a Luxembourgish parent and the father became a Luxembourger in 2016. As a result, it would be wrong to refuse one of the twins citizenship. The court has annulled the ministry's decision, but the verdict must return to the ministry before it is final.