The Trump administration’s renewed focus on denaturalization—the process of revoking U.S. citizenship from naturalized individuals—carries both visible and invisible costs. These consequences extend beyond legal proceedings, affecting families, communities, and the broader U.S. economy.
Denaturalization is a process where the U.S. government strips citizenship away from a naturalized citizen who was born in another country and went through the steps to acquire citizenship with the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS). Once denaturalized, the affected individual returns to the immigration status they had prior to becoming a U.S. citizen. Reasons for the initiation of denaturalization proceedings include fraud or misrepresentation in the naturalization process, concealment of affiliations with criminal or terrorist groups, Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) loan fraud, and violent crimes. The June 2025 memo issued by the Department of Justice also indicates that the Civil Division is not limited to the categories included above or elsewhere in the memo and may pursue cases outside of these enumerated areas at its discretion. In civil denaturalization proceedings, there is no statute of limitations, and the government must satisfy its burden of proof with clear, convincing, and unequivocal evidence that leaves no doubt. On the other hand, in criminal denaturalization proceedings, the government must satisfy its burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt and the criminal conviction must be within a ten-year statute of limitations.
With the DOJ’s Civil Division’s prioritization memo issued in June, combined with the lack of a statute of limitations for civil denaturalization, there are concerns that the current administration may broaden the scope of the division’s purview leading to significant short-term and long-term impacts. Historically, this is not the first time that the United States has engaged in increased efforts to denaturalize citizens. The U.S. government previously engaged in denaturalization efforts to target individuals with connections to the Communist Party and those that were, or assisted, Nazis after World War II. More recently, the Obama Administration engaged in Operation Janus in 2010 which focused denaturalization efforts on individuals with a final deportation order who used a false identity to obtain citizenship. While there are defenses that can be raised by individuals in denaturalization proceedings, these proceedings can be lengthy – due to the government’s need to satisfy its legal burden – and impact the affected individual’s daily life. The approach also amplifies a climate of fear and uncertainty, where even law-abiding individuals may feel that their once stable status is precarious and subject to sudden scrutiny.
For many, naturalization fits within the idea of the “American Dream” where an individual can enjoy greater benefits than being a lawful permanent resident through the ability to vote in elections, access to federal employment, and even run for public office to be a U.S. senator or U.S. representative. This legal stability is important for many before they engage in activities such as buying a house or starting a business in the United States. Foreign nationals pursuing pathways to citizenship may view the denaturalization prioritization, in addition to other restrictive immigration policies by the current administration, as barriers to ultimately achieving the goal of U.S. citizenship and decide not to participate in the process. This can also be challenging to individuals who may become stateless with the loss of their U.S. passport through the denaturalization process as they may be unable to claim citizenship for their country of birth or country of residence due to geopolitical or personal circumstances. It can also impact children, who derived citizenship from their naturalized parents or may be in mixed-status families, especially if their legal status is tied to a parent undergoing denaturalization. In some cases, individuals may be deported to countries with which they have no meaningful connection.
This renewed focus on denaturalization comes at a time when the United States is experiencing a declining birth rate, shortages in critical physician and nursing specialties, and global competition for STEM and entrepreneurial talents. For example, international physicians accepted into U.S. residency programs, may hesitate to pursue a path towards citizenship due to the uncertainty and perceived instability introduced by expanded denaturalization efforts. The end result of which could leave communities in the United States without adequate medical care, which is an industry that is not only already under a considerable strain, but very reliant on immigrant providers. Studies show that 26% of physicians and surgeons and nearly 40% of home-health aides are immigrants. For many other employers, these efforts can impact employee retention, future planning, recruitment, productivity, and slow down economic growth.
To prevent the politicization of denaturalization proceedings, Congress and the Courts could add additional safeguards, including clearer legal standards, oversight mechanisms, or limits on the scope of discretionary enforcement. Without such protections, the uncertainty may deter international talent from pursuing the American Dream and contributing to the growth of the United States.
The material contained in this article 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.
Reprinted with permission from the July 15, 2025 edition of The Legal Intelligencer© 2024 ALM Media Properties, LLC. All rights reserved. Further duplication without permission is prohibited. ALMReprints.com – 877-257-3382 – reprints@alm.com.
