Trump moves to revoke US citizenships from naturalised Americans

Middle East Eye

10 hours ago

The Trump administration is making it a priority to strip US citizenship from certain groups of immigrants.
A memo dictated by the White House to the Department of Justice (DOJ) Civil Division has ordered staff to begin "prioritizing denaturalisation" of US citizens who "engaged in the commission of war crimes, extrajudicial killings, or other serious human rights abuses", or who have been convicted of crimes that are deemed a "threat" to the country.
The memo also cites gang membership as a reason to revoke citizenship status.
Although the instructions are dated 11 June 2025, they were only made public recently.
"Those who obtained [citizenship] through fraud or concealment of material information, do not maintain the benefits of the unlawful procurement," the memo also said.
New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch
Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters
" The Civil Division shall prioritise and maximally pursue denaturalisation proceedings in all cases permitted by law and supported by the evidence," the text instructed.
Chief among the targeted individuals would be those who "pose a potential danger to national security," a designation that this administration has decided Secretary of State Marco Rubio alone has the discretion to make.
He is still trying to deport former Columbia University student Mahmoud Khalil, who is now out on bail, by deeming him a threat to US foreign policy for his pro-Palestine activism. Khalil's permanent resident status, known as a green card, remains revoked.
A person with a green card has long-held similar rights to citizenship, except for the ability to vote in elections.
Other targeted categories include those who "committed felonies that were not disclosed during the naturalisation process" and anyone involved in sex offences or financial fraud - not just against the government, but also against other individuals.
"The Civil Division retains the discretion to pursue cases outside of these categories as it determines appropriate," the memo concluded.
The Trump administration's plan to deport undocumented immigrants began in a similar fashion, when on the campaign trail, the president said he would target "violent criminals".
But since then, the White House has redefined the crime to be the undocumented status itself, leading to nationwide arrests by masked Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents.
Several videos posted to social media by relatives or bystanders show agonised mothers and children being abruptly separated, with one or the other placed into prison trucks to be taken away for deportation.
The violent and public nature of the arrests, as well as a string of mistaken arrests of US citizens of Hispanic origin, has created a chilling effect across immigrant communities, as well as among US visa holders, given Rubio's pledge to revoke as many temporary statuses as he can.
Birthright
According to the Migration Policy Institute, some seven percent of the 340 million people in the US are naturalised citizens.
A naturalised citizen is someone who immigrated to the US and obtained citizenship via a legal process, as opposed to obtaining it through birthright.
But now, even being born in the US may no longer include a guarantee of citizenship.
US Supreme Court limits judges from blocking Trump order on birthright citizenship Read More »
Under the 14th Amendment of the US Constitution, all children born in the US - with some exceptions for diplomats, among others - automatically become US citizens. But the Trump administration has sought to abolish that right since he assumed office in January.
Trump signed an executive order on 20 January to end automatic citizenship rights. His order decrees that children born to parents in the US illegally or on temporary visas would not automatically become citizens.
The highly controversial move was met with a series of lawsuits, which ultimately led to judges in district courts in three states issuing nationwide injunctions that blocked the order from taking effect.
The DOJ responded by taking the case to the Supreme Court.
The case was not about birthright citizenship directly, but whether a single federal district court judge has the right to issue a nationwide block to a presidential decree through a universal injunction.
On Friday, Trump claimed victory after the Supreme Court decided in a 6-3 ruling that nationwide injunctions or pauses issued by district court judges "likely exceed the equitable authority that Congress has granted to federal courts".
On Monday, a lawyer for the government said children who do not have at least one US citizen or green card holder parent would not be considered deportable until at least 27 July, when the Trump birthright order would come into effect.
It's unclear whether the law will be applied retroactively.
Between now and then, multiple class action lawsuits are being put together at the state level to challenge the order, given that the Supreme Court has made room for reprieve via class action rather than singular decisions by a federal judge.
National database
Last week, National Public Radio (NPR) revealed that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), along with the Department of Government Efficiency (Doge), has built, for the very first time, a database where it can check if an individual is a US citizen or not.
The programme is meant to help local and state officials weed out any fraudulent votes in their elections, but privacy and civil liberties advocates said there are far too few irregular ballots to make any real difference in US elections. Their concerns, they said, are about the other ways in which the software can be used.
While having a roster of citizens is both normal and expected in many countries around the world, this has not been the case in the US because of its design as a settler colony since its inception.
Republicans in particular, NPR noted, have always been critical of mass data consolidation by the government.
But perhaps not anymore, given their majority backing of Trump.
Legal experts told NPR that there may be a litany of issues with the database, beginning with the lack of a public notification process. Typically, for the government to collect so much information on US residents, it needs to provide public notice and receive feedback first.
There's also the question of whether reliable data security measures are being taken. During the first Trump administration, some states refused to hand over their voter data to the federal government, given that each state handles its own ballots every election cycle, including those for the US president.
Others argue that it could be a positive development across the board, allowing citizens to participate in elections more efficiently, as they would not have to produce identification documents to prove their identity.