The internal USCIS guidance issued on December
16, 2025, as part of a broader set of priorities for fiscal year 2026 (which
began October 1, 2025), explicitly directs USCIS field offices to "supply
Office of Immigration Litigation with 100-200 denaturalization cases per
month" for referral to the DOJ. This would total 1,200–2,400 cases
annually if met, a dramatic increase from historical norms—e.g., just over 120
cases filed nationwide from 2017 through mid-2025.
In a bold move announced in December 2025, U.S. Citizenship
and Immigration Services (USCIS) has directed its field offices to
significantly ramp up the number of denaturalization cases referred to the
Department of Justice (DOJ). This directive, part of the agency’s broader
fiscal year 2026 priorities (which began October 1, 2025), mandates the
submission of 100–200 denaturalization cases per month to the Office of
Immigration Litigation (OIL). If met, this target would result in 1,200–2,400
cases annually—a staggering 10 to 20-fold increase over historical
averages. From 2017 through mid-2025, fewer than 120 such cases were filed
nationwide. This policy shift raises critical questions about enforcement
priorities, due process, and the future of U.S. immigration law.
What Is Denaturalization?
Denaturalization is the legal process of revoking a person’s
U.S. citizenship. This typically occurs when an individual obtained citizenship
through fraud, misrepresentation, or illegal activity. For example, if a person
lied on their naturalization application or committed crimes such as tax
evasion or fraud after becoming a citizen, U.S. authorities could use
denaturalization as a legal recourse. Unlike deportation (which applies to
non-citizens), denaturalization can strip a person of their legal status not
just in the U.S. but in their country of origin, often leading to deportation
as a secondary step.
The New Guidance: What It Means
The internal USCIS memo, issued December 16, 2025, requires
field offices to prioritize identifying and prosecuting citizenship fraud. Each
month, officers must submit 100–200 cases to the DOJ’s OIL for potential
litigation. This marks a sharp departure from the agency’s traditional role,
which has focused more on processing visas and citizenship applications than on
proactive enforcement.
This surge in cases is part of a broader push by the Biden
administration (or the administration in power at the time) to address
perceived gaps in immigration integrity. While the specifics of the policy
remain under wraps, the directive aligns with recent efforts to strengthen
enforcement of naturalization laws and combat corruption in the immigration
system.
Historical Context: A Sudden Surge
The proposed increase is unprecedented. Historically,
denaturalization has been a rare tool, often reserved for high-profile cases or
when law enforcement agencies uncover patterns of fraud. From 2017 through
mid-2025, a span of just under 8.5 years, fewer than 120 cases
nationwide reached the DOJ. This means the annual average was roughly
14 cases per year.
By comparison, the new policy could lead to 1,200–2,400
cases annually—a 100x jump. Such a dramatic shift will likely strain USCIS
resources and require significant collaboration between field offices, the DOJ,
and immigration courts. Critics argue this could lead to rushed investigations
or the targeting of vulnerable communities, while supporters view it as a
necessary step to uphold legal standards.
Why the Sudden Focus on Denaturalization?
Analysts speculate that the policy reflects a combination of
factors:
- National
Security Concerns: Tightening scrutiny of citizenship may aim to
prevent individuals with criminal or terrorist ties from obtaining legal
status.
- Fraud
Detection: Increased use of data analytics and cross-agency
coordination may have made it easier to identify cases of fraud.
- Political
Priorities: The timing of the directive (linked to fiscal year 2026)
suggests it aligns with broader immigration enforcement goals, such as
deterring unauthorized immigration or ensuring the integrity of
naturalization processes.
Implications for Immigrant Communities
The policy’s impact could be far-reaching.
Immigrants—particularly those with citizenship concerns—may face heightened
anxiety about their legal status. Fear of denaturalization could also
discourage participation in public programs or interactions with government
agencies.
For current and future naturalization applicants, the stakes
will likely rise. USCIS may implement stricter vetting processes, including
more rigorous interviews, document checks, and background investigations. While
these measures could reduce fraud, they may also create delays and deter
eligible applicants from seeking citizenship.
Legal and Ethical Considerations
Denaturalization is a serious and irreversible action.
Critics of the policy raise concerns about due process, noting that citizenship
is not typically revoked without robust evidence. Legal experts emphasize that
the burden of proof lies with the government, and cases must be built on
verifiable fraud or misconduct.
At the same time, the policy’s proponents argue that
naturalization is a privilege, not an inherent right. They contend that
cracking down on fraud is essential to maintaining trust in the immigration
system and ensuring that citizens are held to the same standards as
non-citizens.
What’s Next?
As USCIS rolls out this policy in 2026, the public and legal
community will be watching closely. Will the surge in cases lead to meaningful
enforcement, or could it result in overreach or errors? How will it affect
immigration courts already burdened with backlogs? And what safeguards will be
in place to protect the rights of individuals?
For now, the directive underscores a pivotal moment in U.S.
immigration law. Whether viewed as a necessary step toward integrity or a
troubling escalation of enforcement, this policy shift will shape the landscape
of citizenship and naturalization for years to come.
Final Thoughts
The USCIS guidance represents a dramatic pivot in immigration enforcement. As
the agency grapples with unprecedented case numbers, it must balance its duty
to uphold U.S. law with the rights and dignity of those impacted. For
immigrants, legal advocates, and policymakers alike, the coming fiscal year
will be a test of whether the policy prioritizes justice as much as order.
