The Department of Justice issued a memo in 2025 directing attorneys to “prioritize and maximally pursue” denaturalization cases — the legal process used to revoke citizenship from naturalized Americans. That part is not speculation. That’s public record.
Historically, denaturalization has been rare and generally reserved for cases involving fraud during the citizenship process, war crimes, terrorism, or other serious misconduct. Courts have treated citizenship as one of the most protected rights a person can possess.
The concern is not that millions of people are losing citizenship tomorrow.
The concern is that the federal government is actively expanding a tool that was once used only sparingly.
Once government gains a new power, history suggests it rarely volunteers to give that power back.
Today’s target may be someone accused of fraud.
Tomorrow’s target may be someone a different administration decides is “important” enough to pursue.
That’s why civil liberties organizations, immigration attorneys, and constitutional scholars are paying attention. Not because denaturalization is new, but because the scope and priority surrounding it have changed.
Citizenship should mean something.
If you followed every rule, completed every requirement, passed every test, swore every oath, and became an American citizen, that status should not feel conditional on who happens to occupy the White House.
A nation built by immigrants should be very careful whenever government starts looking for new ways to decide who belongs.
Scarlett says no.