DOJ memo pushes for broader effort to revoke naturalized US citizenship
The June 11 memo tells attorneys in the Civil Division to move to strip citizenship from immigrants if they pose a threat to national security or gained the status through fraud by failing to acknowledge past crimes.
But the memo lists a number of other qualifying crimes, adding that attorneys can prioritize denaturalization even for those who are facing 'pending criminal charges' that have not yet secured a conviction.
It recommends denaturalization for those 'who pose a potential danger to national security, including those with a nexus to terrorism' or who 'committed felonies that were not disclosed during the naturalization process' or otherwise made 'material misrepresentations.'
It also notes the memo is not intended to place any limits on denaturalization efforts, saying its attorneys can also take up 'any other cases referred to the Civil Division that the Division determines to be sufficiently important to pursue.'
'The provision is so vague that it would permit the Division to denaturalize for just about anything. It could be something prior to or following naturalization. Given the other priorities discussed in the memo, it could be exercising First Amendment rights or encouraging diversity in hiring, now recast as fraud against the United States. Troublesome journalists who are naturalized citizens? Students? University professors? Infectious disease doctors who try to reveal the truth about epidemics? Lawyers?' Joyce Vance, a law professor and former U.S. attorney appointed by former President Obama, wrote on her blog.
'All are now vulnerable to the vagaries of an administration that has shown a preference for deporting people without due process and dealing with questions that come up after the fact and with a dismissive tone.'
President Trump and other GOP figures have suggested deporting political adversaries.
Trump on Tuesday said he'll 'take a look' when asked by a reporter if he would report Elon Musk given his criticism of the president's 'big beautiful bill.'
'I don't know. I think we'll have to take a look. We might have to put DOGE on Elon. You know what DOGE is? DOGE is the monster that might have to go back and eat Elon. Wouldn't that be terrible,' Trump said, referencing the Department of Government Efficiency.
And after progressive candidate Zohran Mamdani won the Democratic primary for the New York mayoral race, Rep. Andy Ogles (R-Tenn.) called for stripping the citizenship of the Ugandan-born nominee.
But the directive from the Justice Department also poses a risk to the nearly 25 million naturalized U.S. citizens, according to 2023 data.
A judge has already approved one denaturalization for Elliot Duke, an Army veteran and United Kingdom dual citizen. Elliot was found to have been 'distributing child sexual abuse material' but failed to acknowledge the matter when applying for naturalization and being asked about any past illegal activity.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Times
26 minutes ago
- New York Times
The Senate and the Supreme Court
The Senate narrowly passed Republicans' sprawling bill to slash taxes and social safety net programs. Vice President JD Vance cast the tiebreaking vote, after three Republican senators — Susan Collins, Thom Tillis and Rand Paul — voted no. The bill extends roughly $3.8 trillion in tax cuts enacted during Trump's first term and increases funding for border security and the military. It cuts about $1.1 trillion from health care programs, mainly Medicaid, which experts estimate will cause nearly 12 million Americans to lose coverage. The bill, which could affect millions of Americans, is a major political gamble, Carl Hulse writes. The House must now decide whether to pass the Senate's version of the bill or try to reconcile it with its own. Any delays could mean that Congress misses the July 4 deadline that Trump set. The Morning's readers were interested in the bill yesterday (it was our most-clicked link). Here's more from Times reporters who were in the Capitol: In all, senators voted 49 times during a 27-hour marathon session. They wore fluffy blankets and pullover sweatshirts inside the chilly chamber. Senator Lisa Murkowski, Republican of Alaska, cast a deciding vote for the bill after winning carveouts for her state. 'Do I like this bill? No,' she told NBC News afterward. 'But I tried to take care of Alaska's interests.' Trump and Elon Musk returned to jousting on social media about the legislation. The bill's policies could inflict major financial pain on poor Americans. Republicans have insisted that the policy package will help seniors and the middle class. Here's a fact check. Covering the court The end of June is some combination of Christmas and Tax Day for Adam Liptak, who has covered the Supreme Court for The Times since 2008. That's when the justices release a dizzying array of rulings: This term's major cases, some of which were decided earlier in the year, touched on guns, porn, police tactics, religion, citizenship, L.G.B.T.Q. rights, vapes and TikTok. How the Supreme Court voted in the last two terms Last term 5-4 6-3 7-2 8-1 9-0 This term 5-4 6-3 7-2 8-1 9-0 Last term 5-4 6-3 7-2 8-1 9-0 This term 5-4 6-3 7-2 8-1 9-0 Note: Chart shows nine-person decisions that were orally argued and signed. Sources: Lee Epstein and Andrew D. Martin, Washington University in St. Louis; Michael J. Nelson, Penn State from the Supreme Court Database By The New York Times Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
Bloomberg
31 minutes ago
- Bloomberg
Trump Tax Bill Faces GOP Resistance Ahead of House Vote
President Donald Trump's multitrillion-dollar tax bill is meeting resistance in the House as Republican lawmakers threaten to defy Trump and sink his domestic agenda. Tyler Kendall reports on Bloomberg Television. (Source: Bloomberg)
Yahoo
31 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump keeps saying the GOP mega bill will eliminate taxes on Social Security. It does not
WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump keeps saying that Republicans' mega tax and spending cut legislation will eliminate taxes on federal Social Security benefits. It does not. At best, Donald Trump's 'no tax on Social Security' claim exaggerates the benefits to seniors if either the House or Senate-passed proposals is signed into law. Here's a look at Trump's recent statements, and what the proposals would — or would not — do. What Trump has said Trump repeatedly told voters during his 2024 campaign that he would eliminate taxes on Social Security. As his massive legislative package has moved through Congress, the Republican president has claimed that's what the bill would do. Trump said on a recent appearance on Fox News' 'Sunday Morning Futures" that the bill includes 'no tax on tips, no tax on Social Security, no tax on overtime.' A temporary tax deduction But instead of eliminating the tax, the Senate and House have each passed their own versions of a temporary tax deduction for seniors aged 65 and over, which applies to all income — not just Social Security. And it turns out not all Social Security beneficiaries will be able to claim the deduction. Those who won't be able to do so include the lowest-income seniors who already don't pay taxes on Social Security, those who choose to claim their benefits before they reach age 65 and those above a defined income threshold. The Senate proposal includes a temporary $6,000 deduction for seniors over the age of 65, contrasted with the House proposal, which includes a temporary deduction of $4,000. The Senate proposal approved Tuesday would eliminate Social Security tax liability for seniors with adjusted gross incomes of $75,000 or less or $150,000 if filing as a married couple. If passed into law, the tax deduction would last four years, from 2025 to 2029. The deductions phase out as income increases. White House touts impact Touting a new Council of Economic Advisers analysis, the White House said Tuesday that '88% of all seniors who receive Social Security — will pay NO TAX on their Social Security benefits," going on to say that the Senate proposal's $6,000 senior deduction 'is estimated to benefit 33.9 million seniors, including seniors not claiming Social Security. The deduction yields an average increase in after-tax income of $670 per senior who benefits from it.' Garrett Watson, director of policy analysis at the Tax Foundation think tank, said conflating the tax deduction with a claim that there will be no tax on Social Security could end up confusing and angering a lot of seniors who will expect to not pay taxes on their Social Security benefits. 'While the deduction does provide some relief for seniors, it's far from completely repealing the tax on their benefits,' Watson said. Economic effect The cost of actually eliminating the tax on Social Security would have massive impacts on the economy. University of Pennsylvania's Penn Wharton Budget Model estimates that eliminating income taxes on Social Security benefits 'would reduce revenues by $1.5 trillion over 10 years and increase federal debt by 7 percent by 2054" and speed up the projected depletion date of the Social Security Trust Fund from 2034 to 2032. Discussions over taxes on Social Security are just part of the overall bill, which is estimated in its Senate version to increase federal deficits over the next 10 years by nearly $3.3 trillion from 2025 to 2034, according to the Congressional Budget Office. Administration officials have said the cost of the tax bill would be offset by tariff income. Recently, the CBO separately estimated that Trump's sweeping tariff plan would cut deficits by $2.8 trillion over a 10-year period while shrinking the economy, raising the inflation rate and reducing the purchasing power of households overall.
