hold on there's just too much going on in Congress lmao...
Expands grounds to revoke US citizenship for specific crimes/fraud committed after naturalization.
Mr. Schmitt (Senator)
Placed on Senate calendar, awaiting further action.
This bill aims to make it easier for the Attorney General to revoke the citizenship of naturalized individuals who commit certain offenses, such as government fraud over $10,000, associating with foreign terrorist organizations, or aggravated felonies/espionage, within 10 years of becoming a citizen. These actions would be considered evidence that the person lacked eligibility for citizenship at the time of naturalization. The bill was introduced by Senator Schmitt, read twice, and is now on the Senate's legislative calendar, meaning it's ready for potential debate or a vote.
Introduced Jan 15, 2026
The bill was introduced in the Senate by Mr. Schmitt, read twice, and then placed on the Senate's legislative calendar on January 26, 2026. This means the bill is currently awaiting further action by the full Senate, such as floor debate or a vote. For it to become law, it would need to pass the Senate, then pass the House of Representatives, and finally be signed by the President.
If this bill becomes law, naturalized U.S. citizens who are convicted of or admit to specific serious crimes — such as defrauding government programs of $10,000 or more, associating with foreign terrorist organizations, or committing aggravated felonies or espionage — within 10 years of naturalizing could have their citizenship revoked. This revocation would be retroactive, making their citizenship void from the day it was granted. Individuals whose citizenship is canceled under these new rules would then be subject to expedited deportation proceedings.
Supporters Say
Proponents believe this bill strengthens the integrity of U.S. citizenship and ensures those who betray their obligations can be denaturalized.
Critics Say
Opponents may argue it creates a two-tiered citizenship system and challenges long-standing legal precedents regarding denaturalization.
The bill's text explicitly states that a past Supreme Court interpretation of denaturalization law (Costello v. INS, 1964) was misconstrued, signaling an intent to overturn or reinterpret existing legal precedent to make denaturalization easier. Supporters would likely argue that committing serious crimes or fraud after naturalization proves a lack of good moral character from the outset, justifying the retroactive revocation of citizenship. Critics might express concerns about creating instability for naturalized citizens and potentially undermining the finality of naturalization.