On June 11, 2025, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) Civil Division issued a memorandum announcing a policy shift that heightens the priority of civil denaturalization enforcement. The directive, titled “Guidance Memorandum on Civil Denaturalization Cases,” instructs DOJ attorneys to focus resources on cases that attempt to reverse a grant of naturalized U.S. citizenship for individuals found to have obtained it unlawfully or fraudulently.
This DOJ policy update mirrors its recent focus on immigration enforcement, including the expansion of its corporate whistleblower program to immigration violations. In early 2025, the DOJ announced that it was prioritizing immigration-related criminal cases.
Very High Burden of Proof
Denaturalization cases require the government to meet the highest burden of proof in civil proceedings: clear and convincing evidence. Under this strict standard, the government must present evidence that is highly and substantially more probable to be true than not that they obtained U.S. citizenship unlawfully or fraudulently. This high standard aims to prevent government overreach and necessarily limits the scope of the government’s ability to denaturalize individuals.
Key Aspects of the Policy
The new DOJ memo states that DOJ Civil Division leadership views denaturalization cases as a priority, encouraging the use of civil litigation as a strategic tool to address fraud in the immigration system. DOJ lawyers are directed to coordinate with U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).
To progress this policy, DOJ is reallocating resources to support enforcement efforts, including prioritizing case development, litigation staffing, and training trial attorneys. This reallocation suggests the volume and complexity of denaturalization actions could increase. Additionally, the memo outlines expectations for inter-agency cooperation to gather evidence and intelligence, especially in cases involving terrorism, espionage, or organized immigration fraud.
The DOJ sets forth in the memo several criteria to categorize and prioritize these cases, including:
- Cases against individuals who pose a potential danger to national security, including those with a nexus to terrorism, espionage or unlawful export from the United States of sensitive goods, technology, or information raising national security concerns;
- Cases against individuals who engaged in torture, war crimes, or other human rights violations;
- Cases against individuals who further or furthered the unlawful enterprise of criminal gangs, transnational criminal organizations, and drug cartels;
- Cases against individuals who committed felonies that were not disclosed during the naturalization process;
- Cases against individuals who committed human trafficking, sex offenses, or violent crimes;
- Cases against individuals who engaged in various forms of financial fraud against the United States (including Paycheck Protection Program (“PPP”) loan fraud and Medicaid/Medicare fraud);
- Cases against individuals who engaged in fraud against private individuals, funds, or corporations;
- Cases against individuals who acquired naturalization through government corruption, fraud, or material misrepresentations, not otherwise addressed by another priority category;
- Cases referred by a United States Attorney’s Office or in connection with pending criminal charges, if those charges do not fit within one of the other priorities; and
- Any other cases referred to the Civil Division that the Division determines to be sufficiently important to pursue.
Impacts on Foreign-Born U.S. Citizens
This policy shift could have profound implications for any targeted naturalized citizens, such as those who covered up criminality or explicitly lied about it in their naturalization application. Historically, DOJ has focused denaturalization actions on such cases involving significant criminal cover-ups. DOJ still emphasizes that its focus is on serious fraud and national security threats, although it could take a broader view of what constitutes “material misrepresentation.” That broader focus could potentially put a wider swath of naturalized citizens at risk, such as those who may appear to have misrepresented a smaller fact on one of their past immigrant or non-immigrant applications.
Even so, to obtain denaturalization the government will still have to prove that the concealed fact was sufficiently “material” that it could have been useful in an investigation possibly leading to the discovery of other facts warranting denial of citizenship. In denaturalization proceedings, noncitizens retain due process rights, including the right to learn about the charges against them, the right to present evidence and witnesses in their defense, and the right to a fair and impartial hearing
Naturalized citizens should consider that:
- Serious past immigration misstatements, even if unintentional or long resolved, may trigger DOJ scrutiny;
- Criminal activity that occurred prior to naturalization could be a basis for denaturalization in the future if discovered by government officials;
- Involvement in marriage fraud, asylum fraud, or misstatements in prior immigration applications could serve as a target for revocation of citizenship;
- Ongoing immigration investigations or public benefits fraud may be referred to DOJ for denaturalization investigation.
What To Do If You Have Concerns About Your Pre-Naturalization Conduct
To prepare for this policy change and future enforcement, foreign-born U.S. citizens with concerns about possible misrepresentations during the immigration or naturalization process should consider talking to an immigration attorney. Individuals concerned about denaturalization should speak with an attorney before traveling abroad, as pending litigation or findings of fraud could impact re-entry or passport renewal. Proactive legal review can help prevent future complications.
Klasko Immigration Law Partners is continuing to monitor this policy and new enforcement actions. Please reach out to your Klasko Immigration attorney or schedule a consultation if you believe your naturalization or immigration history may be affected.
The material contained in this alert does not constitute direct legal advice and is for informational purposes only. An attorney-client relationship is not presumed or intended by receipt or review of this presentation. The information provided should never replace informed counsel when specific immigration-related guidance is needed.
© 2025 Klasko Immigration Law Partners, LLP. All rights reserved. Information may not be reproduced, displayed, modified, or distributed without the express prior written permission of Klasko Immigration Law Partners, LLP. For permission, contact info@klaskolaw.com.
