Department of Justice Focuses on Denaturalization Cases
The Department of Justice (DOJ) has initiated a new directive emphasizing the enforcement of denaturalization cases, marking a significant shift in how naturalized citizenship is approached. This directive opens the door to increased civil proceedings aimed at revoking American citizenship from individuals who obtained it through naturalization processes.
A Shift in Policy
Announced on June 11, the enforcement agenda builds upon previous policies enacted during the Obama administration, which capitalized on advanced digital tools to uncover instances of naturalization fraud spanning several decades. According to the memo from Assistant Attorney General Brett A. Shumate, DOJ attorneys are urged to “maximally pursue denaturalization proceedings in all cases permitted by law and supported by evidence.”
Key Areas of Focus
The memo identifies ten priority categories for denaturalization, which target individuals engaged in serious unlawful activities:
- Terrorism
- Gang Activity
- War Crimes
- Extrajudicial Killings
- Serious Human Rights Abuses
- Financial Fraud
- Healthcare Fraud
- Misrepresentation during the naturalization process
The Legal Landscape
Civil denaturalization cases differ significantly from criminal cases; they do not require a jury trial and hold a lower burden of proof. Moreover, defendants are not guaranteed legal representation. This raises concerns among critics, who argue that the new framework could allow for potential targeting based on political or racial biases.
Broader DOJ Initiatives
This directive is part of a broader shift in priorities under Attorney General Bondi. Other efforts include:
- Actions against sanctuary cities
- Initiatives focusing on diversity and equity
- Policies related to gender-affirming treatments
A Historical Context
The practice of denaturalization has been used historically as a political tool, particularly during the McCarthy era when it peaked at about 22,000 cases annually in the late 1940s and early 1950s. However, a 1967 Supreme Court ruling curbed this practice, noting that it created "two levels of citizenship," which contradicted American democratic principles. Subsequently, annual cases dwindled to single digits for decades.
A Resurgence of Denaturalization
The trend began to shift again during the Obama administration’s "Operation Janus." The subsequent Trump administration further amplified these efforts, formally instructing attorneys to employ civil courts for denaturalization cases instead of pursuing criminal pathways.
“There just aren’t very many cases that fit within the framework of priorities for denaturalization,” stated author Kristen Robertson in her 2019 report “Un(Civil) Denaturalization.” She cautioned that the drive for maximal enforcement could inadvertently target individuals without significant infractions.
Recent Developments
The DOJ’s new directive has already led to notable cases, including the revocation of citizenship for Elliott Duke, a British-born American military veteran, who had his citizenship revoked following a conviction for distributing child sexual abuse material, a serious offense undisclosed during his naturalization process.
Conclusion
The DOJ’s renewed focus on denaturalization illustrates a marked shift in immigration enforcement. As proceedings ramp up, the implications for naturalized citizens and the potential for misuse based on political or racial motives remain critical points of discussion."
For more information on denaturalization and its implications, visit American Civil Liberties Union and National Public Radio.
