Trump Is Threatening to Take Away People's Citizenship. Can He?
Source: Slate Magazine
Trump Is Threatening to Take Away Peoples Citizenship. Can He?
Felipe De La Hoz
Fri, July 11, 2025 at 5:40 AM EDT
7 min read
-snip-
Those whove been following the administrations crackdown immediately recognized the latter two points in particular as a catchall for people engaged in disfavored speech and political activity, like Mahmoud Khalil, the former Columbia University graduate student, Palestinian student organizer, and green card holder detained by federal agents in March. That this effort could be used as a form of political policing was further bolstered in the aftermath of Zohran Mamdanis upset victory in the New York City Democratic mayoral primary, after which right-wing figures, including sitting Tennessee Rep. Andy Ogles, called for the naturalized New Yorker to be stripped of citizenship and deported. Ogles sent a letter to that effect to Attorney General Pam Bondi before Trump himself weighed in, musing about having Mamdani arrested.
Yet, as concerning as these developments are, actually going through with a denaturalization is a complicated and legally fraught process. Everyone else who has migrated herefrom immigrants lacking legal status to full permanent residentscan be put through the administrative immigration court system, which itself exists within the DOJ and under the control of Trumps handpicked leader, Bondi. It is this lack of judicial independence that has enabled Immigration and Customs Enforcement prosecutors and immigration judges to collude to dismiss active asylum cases for the agency to be able to arrest people attending their own immigration hearings.
That is not the case for naturalized citizens, though. The immigration courts have no jurisdiction over U.S. citizens, so the only way for the administration to attempt to strip citizenship is to go through the actual federal judiciary, which is far more independent and much less likely to look favorably upon efforts to target the relatively ironclad protections of citizenship. The government can attempt either a civil or criminal denaturalization, with the latter alleging that the naturalization itself was obtained through criminal means. Despite the Supreme Courts recent kowtowing to the more authoritarian aspects of Trumps agenda, in the unanimous 2017 decision in Maslenjak v. United States, the court ruled that the government could not strip citizenship from a woman who had lied about her husband having served in the Bosnian Serb army because the denaturalization statute demands a causal or means-end connection between a legal violation and naturalization.
-snip-
Read more: https://www.yahoo.com/news/could-trump-actually-deport-elon-094000717.html

no_hypocrisy
(52,340 posts)Rosie ODonnells citizenshipand shes living in Ireland.
LetMyPeopleVote
(166,448 posts)Link to tweet
Paladin
(31,061 posts)Eliot Rosewater
(33,180 posts)It really doesnt matter anymore. They will just ignore any judge or any court order and eventually itll get to the Supreme Court and the fascist Nazis there will clear the way for this piece of shit to destroy America.
100% of this was preventable in 2016. If only people had behaved differently regards, Hillary Clinton. 😡
walkingman
(9,568 posts)he is constantly running his mouth. I don't see how he ever had a girlfriend and definitely not a wife.
Who would want to be around him for any length of time?
markodochartaigh
(3,368 posts)"One fact often getting lost in the shuffle is that a naturalized citizen cannot be denaturalized for anything that happens after their naturalization. Obviously, a citizen who commits a federal crime can still be prosecuted and imprisoned for it, but their citizenship itself cannot be touched on that basis. Whatever the administration would want to trot out to target a citizen would need to have occurred during or prior to the naturalization process."
Let's hope that whatever judge Trump's doj cherry picks agrees with this, and that the supremacist court does as well.
But the bottom line is, does citizenship even matter if Trump's Imperial Storm Troopers can snatch citizens off the street and dump them anywhere in the world? How long before lgbtq activists are dumped in Uganda where they are subject to the death penalty?
Eliot Rosewater
(33,180 posts)And the corrupt Supreme Court letting him do whatever he wants
LetMyPeopleVote
(166,448 posts)lees1975
(6,693 posts)The answer is NO.
LetMyPeopleVote
(166,448 posts)Here is a good analysis of denaturalization. It would be almost impossible for trump to strip Rosie of her citizenship without a nasty lawsuit
With President Trump threatening to revoke Rosie OâDonnellâs citizenship, it seems like a good time to re-up my explainer on denaturalization and expatriation â and why what Trump is suggesting is ⦠not viable:
— Steve Vladeck (@stevevladeck.bsky.social) 2025-07-12T18:40:26.584Z
https://www.stevevladeck.com/p/146-denaturalization-and-expatriation
Historically, and for good reasons, it has been exceptionally difficult for the government to involuntarily revoke an Americans citizenship. 8 U.S.C. § 1481 identifies seven classes of activities that can subject citizens to a loss of citizenship:
(1) obtaining naturalization in a foreign state upon his own application or upon an application filed by a duly authorized agent, after having attained the age of eighteen years; or
(2) taking an oath or making an affirmation or other formal declaration of allegiance to a foreign state or a political subdivision thereof, after having attained the age of eighteen years; or
(3) entering, or serving in, the armed forces of a foreign state if (A) such armed forces are engaged in hostilities against the United States, or (B) such persons serve as a commissioned or non-commissioned officer; or
(4)(A) accepting, serving in, or performing the duties of any office, post, or employment under the government of a foreign state or a political subdivision thereof, after attaining the age of eighteen years if he has or acquires the nationality of such foreign state; or (B) accepting, serving in, or performing the duties of any office, post, or employment under the government of a foreign state or a political subdivision thereof, after attaining the age of eighteen years for which office, post, or employment an oath, affirmation, or declaration of allegiance is required; or
(5) making a formal renunciation of nationality before a diplomatic or consular officer of the United States in a foreign state, in such form as may be prescribed by the Secretary of State; or
(6) making in the United States a formal written renunciation of nationality in such form as may be prescribed by, and before such officer as may be designated by, the Attorney General, whenever the United States shall be in a state of war and the Attorney General shall approve such renunciation as not contrary to the interests of national defense; or
(7) committing any act of treason against, or attempting by force to overthrow, or bearing arms against, the United States, violating or conspiring to violate any of the provisions of section 2383 of title 18, or willfully performing any act in violation of section 2385 of title 18, or violating section 2384 of title 18 by engaging in a conspiracy to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, if and when he is convicted thereof by a court martial or by a court of competent jurisdiction.
As should be clear from this list, most of the circumstances involve behavior in which an individual has manifested a specific and voluntary desire to surrender their citizenshipand not when citizenship has been revoked as a punishment. And even for subsection (a)(7), the one part that doesnt seem to require that on its face, the statute today includes an umbrella conditionthat loss of citizenship depends upon whether the individual voluntarily perform[ed] any of the [specified] acts with the intention of relinquishing United States nationality.......
Section 1481 applies to all U.S. citizens. For naturalized citizens (i.e., those who become citizens after birth), theres one additional basis for revoking citizenshipand thats if and only if their citizenship was illegally procured or . . . procured by concealment of a material fact or by willful misrepresentation. Here, too, the statute (and, almost certainly, the Constitution) requires notice and meaningful judicial review before an Americans citizenship can be stripped. As 8 U.S.C. § 1451(b) mandates,
The party to whom was granted the naturalization alleged to have been illegally procured or procured by concealment of a material fact or by willful misrepresentation shall, in any such proceedings under subsection (a) of this section, have sixty days personal notice, unless waived by such party, in which to make answers to the petition of the United States . . . .
Of course, the government can pursue denaturalization on broader grounds than it can pursue expatriationsince the Constitution doesnt create a substantive right to naturalization in the same way it does for birthright citizenship. But the key is that here, too, the Supreme Court has regularly insisted not only on meaningful judicial review of denaturalization proceedings, but on construing the relevant statutes narrowlyincluding, most recently, in 2017. (For much more on the complexities of denaturalization, see this fantastic February 2020 Practice Advisory from the National Lawyers Guild and the Immigrant Legal Resource Center.)
In other words, although denaturalization is potentially available in more cases than expatriation, it still requires meaningful, individualized judicial reviewreview that holds the government to a significant burden in providing that an individual wrongfully obtained their citizenship, and not just that they engaged in questionable behavior thereafter. There is, simply, no easy, fast path to revoking any Americans citizenship without their consentand there hasnt been for decades. That may not stop the current administration from trying it anyway, or from removing citizens unlawfully and then resisting the legal consequences. But its important to be clear on what the actual legal authority for such maneuvers would be. Here, there isnt any.
I was so sad to see Professor Vladeck leave the University of Texas Law School.
LetMyPeopleVote
(166,448 posts)Here is a good analysis of denaturalization. It would be almost impossible for trump to strip Rosie of her citizenship without a nasty lawsuit
With President Trump threatening to revoke Rosie OâDonnellâs citizenship, it seems like a good time to re-up my explainer on denaturalization and expatriation â and why what Trump is suggesting is ⦠not viable:
— Steve Vladeck (@stevevladeck.bsky.social) 2025-07-12T18:40:26.584Z
https://www.stevevladeck.com/p/146-denaturalization-and-expatriation
Historically, and for good reasons, it has been exceptionally difficult for the government to involuntarily revoke an Americans citizenship. 8 U.S.C. § 1481 identifies seven classes of activities that can subject citizens to a loss of citizenship:
(1) obtaining naturalization in a foreign state upon his own application or upon an application filed by a duly authorized agent, after having attained the age of eighteen years; or
(2) taking an oath or making an affirmation or other formal declaration of allegiance to a foreign state or a political subdivision thereof, after having attained the age of eighteen years; or
(3) entering, or serving in, the armed forces of a foreign state if (A) such armed forces are engaged in hostilities against the United States, or (B) such persons serve as a commissioned or non-commissioned officer; or
(4)(A) accepting, serving in, or performing the duties of any office, post, or employment under the government of a foreign state or a political subdivision thereof, after attaining the age of eighteen years if he has or acquires the nationality of such foreign state; or (B) accepting, serving in, or performing the duties of any office, post, or employment under the government of a foreign state or a political subdivision thereof, after attaining the age of eighteen years for which office, post, or employment an oath, affirmation, or declaration of allegiance is required; or
(5) making a formal renunciation of nationality before a diplomatic or consular officer of the United States in a foreign state, in such form as may be prescribed by the Secretary of State; or
(6) making in the United States a formal written renunciation of nationality in such form as may be prescribed by, and before such officer as may be designated by, the Attorney General, whenever the United States shall be in a state of war and the Attorney General shall approve such renunciation as not contrary to the interests of national defense; or
(7) committing any act of treason against, or attempting by force to overthrow, or bearing arms against, the United States, violating or conspiring to violate any of the provisions of section 2383 of title 18, or willfully performing any act in violation of section 2385 of title 18, or violating section 2384 of title 18 by engaging in a conspiracy to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, if and when he is convicted thereof by a court martial or by a court of competent jurisdiction.
As should be clear from this list, most of the circumstances involve behavior in which an individual has manifested a specific and voluntary desire to surrender their citizenshipand not when citizenship has been revoked as a punishment. And even for subsection (a)(7), the one part that doesnt seem to require that on its face, the statute today includes an umbrella conditionthat loss of citizenship depends upon whether the individual voluntarily perform[ed] any of the [specified] acts with the intention of relinquishing United States nationality.......
Section 1481 applies to all U.S. citizens. For naturalized citizens (i.e., those who become citizens after birth), theres one additional basis for revoking citizenshipand thats if and only if their citizenship was illegally procured or . . . procured by concealment of a material fact or by willful misrepresentation. Here, too, the statute (and, almost certainly, the Constitution) requires notice and meaningful judicial review before an Americans citizenship can be stripped. As 8 U.S.C. § 1451(b) mandates,
The party to whom was granted the naturalization alleged to have been illegally procured or procured by concealment of a material fact or by willful misrepresentation shall, in any such proceedings under subsection (a) of this section, have sixty days personal notice, unless waived by such party, in which to make answers to the petition of the United States . . . .
Of course, the government can pursue denaturalization on broader grounds than it can pursue expatriationsince the Constitution doesnt create a substantive right to naturalization in the same way it does for birthright citizenship. But the key is that here, too, the Supreme Court has regularly insisted not only on meaningful judicial review of denaturalization proceedings, but on construing the relevant statutes narrowlyincluding, most recently, in 2017. (For much more on the complexities of denaturalization, see this fantastic February 2020 Practice Advisory from the National Lawyers Guild and the Immigrant Legal Resource Center.)
In other words, although denaturalization is potentially available in more cases than expatriation, it still requires meaningful, individualized judicial reviewreview that holds the government to a significant burden in providing that an individual wrongfully obtained their citizenship, and not just that they engaged in questionable behavior thereafter. There is, simply, no easy, fast path to revoking any Americans citizenship without their consentand there hasnt been for decades. That may not stop the current administration from trying it anyway, or from removing citizens unlawfully and then resisting the legal consequences. But its important to be clear on what the actual legal authority for such maneuvers would be. Here, there isnt any.
I was so sad to see Professor Vladeck leave the University of Texas Law School.