In 1984, Botswana citizen Unity Dow (“Applicant”) married U.S. citizen Peter Nathan Dow. The couple had lived in Botswana for 13 years and were raising three children there. According to Sections 4, 5, and 13 of the Citizenship (Amendment) Act of 1984 (“Act”), a person is a citizen of Botswana if at the time of birth, his or her father was a citizen, or the child was born out of wedlock and their mother is a citizen. A child born to a citizen mother and an alien father therefore acquired citizenship only if born outside of wedlock. The Applicant challenged the law as discriminatory, alleging that because she was married to a noncitizen, she could not pass her citizenship to her children and the Act renders her children aliens in their home country and land of birth. She also argued that such discriminatory treatment relegated women’s legal status to that of a child. Sections 4, 5, and 13 of the Act thus violated Section 7 of the Constitution of Botswana (“Constitution”), which prohibits degrading treatment toward persons. The Applicant further argued that the Act discriminates against women married to foreign husbands and men married to foreign wives. She argued that this treatment violates Section 3(a) of the Constitution, which prohibits discrimination on various stated grounds; neither sex nor gender is one of the stated grounds. However, a separate provision of the Constitution provides that every person in Botswana is entitled to fundamental rights and freedoms, regardless of race, place of origin, color, creed, or sex.  The High Court decided in favor of Applicant, holding that the immigration law was discriminatory and degrading. The Attorney General appealed against the High Court’s decision.