US Citizenship Law: A History of US Denaturalization

This article examines denaturalization in the US, how it works, the grounds for denaturalization, how the law has evolved over the years and continues to evolve today.

We start in the aftermath of the US Civil War and the creation of the Fourteenth Amendment. We then follow the development of US denaturalization policy through two world wars and the Cold War, right through to the present day.

Understanding each new piece of legislation and how it has evolved over the years will help you gain a deeper understanding of precisely what’s happening today. 

In fact, dramatic though President Trump’s citizenship shake-up may be, it’s hardly new. Rather, it is part of a long history of presidents seeking to redefine the notion of US citizenship and, traditionally, their biggest weapon was denaturalization.

US Citizenship & Denaturalization: A Brief History

The story of modern US citizenship law begins with the Fourteenth Amendment.

Coming in the aftermath of the US Civil War, the Fourteenth Amendment extended rights to, and settled the citizenship status of, freed slaves. In doing so, it granted citizenship to all individuals “born or naturalised in the United States.”

The Fourteenth Amendment, which became law in 1868, is one of the cornerstones of the US Constitution and the bedrock upon which many Supreme Court decisions now sit. 

A defining ruling in US citizenship law came three decades later with the United States v. Wong Kim Ark case of 1898. This ruling solidified the notion that an individual born in the United States becomes a citizen, regardless of their race or the nationality of their parents. 

Though this ruling has stood for 127 years, as you’ll see, the issue of denaturalization was far from settled, which is why it continues to be challenged today.

The Naturalization Act

The Naturalization Act of 1906 was the first federal law to establish the concept of denaturalization. Though intended to deter fraud and illegal activity, it didn’t take long before the US government began to weaponize it against those deemed “un-American”. 

America at the time was still reeling from the assassination of President McKinley by anarchist Leon Czolgosz. McKinley’s successor, Teddy Roosevelt, was determined to use the new legislation to punish anarchists and other undesirables with his inimitable Rough Rider gusto. 

One of his primary targets was the prominent anarchist and feminist Emma Goldman, who was eventually deported in 1919, during the Woodrow Wilson administration. 

World War I and the First Red Scare

Woodrow Wilson was president during three defining moments in US history: the First World War, the Bolshevik Revolution and the subsequent Red Scare of 1919.

Though a Democrat, his presidency very closely echoes that of Trump. Wilson was very much an America-First president. He fought hard to keep America out of the Great War until the threat to American shipping posed by German submarines became impossible to ignore. 

The US finally joined WW1 in 1917 and subsequently began rounding up and deporting German immigrants, deporting many.

Wilson also introduced specific legislation relating to espionage, sedition and “alien enemies”. With these new powers, he began rounding up and deporting left-leaning activists, including Teddy Roosevelt’s old nemesis, Emma Goldman, who was put on a boat back to Russia.

Post-war and the Depression

While the administrations of Harding and Coolidge were more focused on restricting immigration, deportations rose again under Hoover and FDR. 

Hoover is known for deporting Mexicans during the Depression. This policy continued under FDR, though, following Pearl Harbour, the focus shifted to the Germans and Japanese, the latter being affected the most. 

World War Two

Under FDR, Japanese people living in the US were rounded up, had their properties seized and placed in internment camps. Of those, 60% were US citizens who had citizenship rights revoked overnight. 

The US defeated the Nazis decisively on the battlefield, but their track record in the courtroom was mixed. Cases often dragged on for decades, and even those who were successfully denaturalised either evaded justice or died before they could face it. 

Not so, however, for Feodor Fedorenko. The Soviet-born Nazi collaborator served as a commander at Poland’s Treblinka extermination camp. 

Fedorenko entered the US under a displaced persons visa, eventually becoming a US citizen. Once his Nazi past was discovered, however, he was denaturalised and deported back to the Soviet Union, where he was executed for treason in 1987. 

Communists & Wiseguys

After the war came a second Red Scare, the rise of McCarthyism and the McCarran Internal Security Act of 1950. Under this law, naturalised citizens could have their citizenship revoked for “un-American” activity. 

Its target was anyone who might seek to establish a “totalitarian regime” in the US, a definition which included fascists, though its main focus was communism. (The legacy of this act can be seen today as prospective citizens are still required to disclose any affiliation with a communist party.) 

The Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) of 1952, also known as the McCarran-Walter Act, built upon this further, strengthening the government’s ability to exclude, denaturalise, and, in some cases, deport, those deemed subversive based on their political ideology. 

That same year, the US attempted to deport a different type of subversive, one with criminal, rather than political, leanings, the mafia crime boss Tommy Lucchese.

This is because, under INI, there was no statute of limitations on denaturalization cases. 

Denaturalization: Statute of Limitations

The Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) of 1952 established that there was no statute of limitations on pursuing denaturalization cases. 

Which is why, the same year the act became law, the US government sought to denaturalise and deport Tommy Lucchese, the head of the Lucchese crime family.

Lucchese was born in Sicily and later moved to the US, becoming one of the “founding fathers” of the American mafia. He also concealed his prior criminal record in Sicily before obtaining citizenship. 

With no statute of limitations, this became grounds for denaturalization. Unfortunately for the US government, the case was thrown out on a technicality. 

Fellow crime boss Frank Costello was not so lucky. In 1959, he was stripped of his US citizenship. Costello lost his 1961 Supreme Court case but successfully fought against his deportation, once again by technicality. He thus remained in the US until his death in 1973.

Both mafia cases proved that US government power was not absolute, and denaturalization and deportation could be challenged.

US Citizenship & The Supreme Court 

By 1967, huge social change was sweeping America, from the civil rights movement to anti-Vietnam protests. 

Another major shift was the Supreme Court ruling of Afroyim v Rusk, a landmark case in US citizenship law. 

The case involved Ben Afroyim, a Polish-born Jew who moved to the US and subsequently naturalised. 

Decades later, he voted in an election in Israel, and the US State Department determined that, in doing so, he had relinquished his US citizenship and therefore refused to renew his passport. 

The Supreme Court, however, ruled that the United States government does not have the power to strip an American of their citizenship without their consent, enshrining US citizenship as immutable. 

Denaturalization, meanwhile, can still occur, but only in cases of fraud, misrepresentation, membership of a proscribed organisation or human rights violations, e.g. human trafficking, war crimes. 

As for the legacy of Afroyim v. Rusk, the numbers say it all. In the period between the Naturalization Act of 1906 and the 1967 Supreme Court ruling, an estimated 22,000 denaturalizations occurred.

Since then, that number is measured in hundreds, not thousands, with an average of around 11 cases per year (though that number is set to rise under Trump 2.0).

Denaturalization Under Trump

Denaturalization investigations and immigration arrests have expanded dramatically under Trump, particularly in his second term. 

Trump has long been a proponent of immigration shutdowns. It was one of his earliest campaign soundbites. So, his latest rhetoric about immigration freezes and crackdowns shouldn’t come as a surprise. Nor should Trump’s threats to denaturalise those he deems “non-compatible” with American values.

For decades, denaturalization has fallen out of favour, but the practice saw a slight increase during the Obama administration as part of Operation Janus, an initiative created to clamp down on immigration fraud. 

Trump seized on this precedent and aggressively expanded it. He also opened a new denaturalization section within the US Department of Justice (DOJ). 

In his first year in office, denaturalization cases more than doubled. They dropped sharply again under Biden, while Trump 2.0 seeks to expand these policies further. 

In political terms, these initiatives have been hugely successful; Trump fulfils his promise to get tougher on immigration, while sowing fear and confusion amongst his opponents. 

In practical terms, however, there is very little he can do. Officials can pursue cases more aggressively and police minor infractions and errors with bureaucratic zeal, but within limits. 

Legally, Trump’s hands are still very much tied. 

The Truth About Denaturalization

As we have seen, denaturalization was once far more common than it is now and was often used as a weapon by administrations to rid themselves of undesirables, with varying degrees of success.

Afroyim v. Rusk made that a lot harder, and this is precisely the ruling the Trump administration would need to first overturn to make any headway, and likely, he would need to overturn other supporting rulings thereafter.

Given Trump’s determination and that of the legal minds he has around him, it’s certainly possible. Right now, however, that effort is aimed elsewhere.

The administration is predominantly focused on challenging the Fourteenth Amendment and the notion of birthright citizenship (which we will be discussing in a future article).

At present, an individual can only be denaturalised under specific circumstances. For example, they did not actually meet the eligibility requirements at the time of naturalisation.

Further grounds for denaturalization are fraud, i.e. lying or deliberately concealing information on one’s application.

For example, if you were a member of “a totalitarian party” (e.g. communist) or an organisation designated a terrorist group by the US government, and subsequently neglected to mention it on your application, that could be grounds for denaturalization. The same goes for becoming a member shortly after becoming naturalised.

What the Trump administration is currently doing is looking at expanding the definition of what constitutes fraud, which will allow them to prosecute more cases.

This, however, is very different from being able to denaturalise citizens at will.

Denaturalization: Key Points

• Denaturalization has long been used as a threat by presidents against those the state deemed to be undesirables.
• Denaturalization was a lot more common in the pre-war period, but Supreme Court rulings, most notably 1967’s Afroyim v. Rusk, prevent the government from involuntary denaturalization.
• Today, a citizen can only be denaturalised if they committed fraud, misrepresented facts on their citizenship application, or through association with a proscribed organisation.
• The first Trump administration established a new department to handle denaturalization, resulting in a rise in cases, predominantly focused on fraud.

Denaturalization: Conclusion

America’s history has always been turbulent, yet it’s hard to escape the feeling that, on the eve of its 250th birthday, the United States has entered a new phase.

As we have seen, Trump’s policies might seem new, but historically speaking, they’re anything but. All that’s really changed is the pace, but that’s more than enough to create a sense of unease.

Quite a thing to start a new life abroad, succeed through hard work and determination, but then have the government threaten to take it all away.

Though this is just one of the reasons why reverse migration is on the rise. Others include the rising cost of living, crime rates, and high taxes. All of these factors combined are why a growing number of both naturalised and US-born Americans have begun leaving the United States for good, in favour of safer, more welcoming and more business-friendly jurisdictions like Dubai.

Always remember, for every country which doesn’t make you welcome, a dozen more are waiting with open arms.

If you feel insecure in your current situation, the time to secure a second citizenship is now. Contact the Millionaire Migrant team and discover how today.

Denaturalization FAQs

What is Denaturalization? 

Denaturalization is the process whereby the US government revokes the citizenship of a naturalised (e.g. a Green Card holder who became a US citizen) person, though it can only do so in specific cases. 

On what grounds can US citizens be denaturalised? 

US citizens who naturalised can be denaturalised in instances of fraud or where the applicant deliberately concealed vital facts on their citizenship application, for example, war crimes, association with a terrorist group, etc.