25 million naturalised Americans face deportation as US begins revocation

“The benefits of civil denaturalization include the government’s ability to revoke the citizenship of individuals who engaged in the commission of war crimes, extrajudicial killings, or other serious human rights abuses; to remove naturalized criminals, gang members, or, indeed, any individuals convicted of crimes who pose an ongoing threat to the United States; and to prevent convicted terrorists from returning to U.S. soil or traveling internationally on a U.S. passport,” the memo states.

READ ALSO:

• Al-Hilal stun Man City in seven-goal Club World Cup thriller
• Pastor sentenced to 25 years for defiling his daughter
• Eviction: APC chieftain files contempt suit against EFCC boss

The DOJ outlined specific categories of cases to be prioritised. These include individuals posing threats to national security — such as those with ties to terrorism, espionage, or illicit export of sensitive U.S. technology — and individuals involved in torture, war crimes, or other human rights abuses.

Also high on the list are those who further criminal gangs or drug cartels; committed undisclosed felonies before naturalisation; or were involved in human trafficking, sex crimes, or violent offences. Financial crimes such as PPP loan fraud and Medicare or Medicaid fraud are also flagged.

Other targeted cases include those involving fraud against private entities, naturalisation obtained through corruption or misrepresentation, and referrals tied to ongoing criminal investigations.

The memo affects a significant population — over 25 million naturalised Americans, according to 2023 data from the Migration Policy Institute.

The move aligns with former President Donald Trump’s aggressive stance on both legal and illegal immigration. Recently, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that federal judges overstepped by blocking Trump’s executive order seeking to end birthright citizenship, which grants automatic citizenship to anyone born on U.S. soil.

Although the court did not decide on the constitutionality of the order itself, it opened the door for the Trump administration to pursue the policy further.