How would the Trump administration denaturalize immigrant citizens?
The next step in the Trump administration's deportation campaign is here. The Department of Justice will prioritize stripping citizenship from naturalized Americans it says have violated the law, a process known as denaturalization.
Denaturalization gives the White House "another tool to police immigrants' free speech rights," said Axios. The administration has already used the deportation process to target immigrant students who criticized Israel's war on Gaza, including green-card holder Mahmoud Khalil. The Justice Department guidance says denaturalization proceedings will be focused on "terrorists," as well as people convicted of "war crimes," "extrajudicial killings" and "human rights abuses."
The denaturalization program is an attempt to "protect the nation from obvious predators, criminals and terrorists," said The Heritage Foundation's Hans von Spakovsky. But immigration experts "expressed serious concerns about the effort's constitutionality," said NPR. The Justice Department will pursue denaturalization in civil courts, which require a lower burden of proof for the government to win. They also do not require that defendants be furnished with an attorney. The Trump administration is "trying to create a second class of U.S. citizens" with fewer rights, said Sameera Hafiz, the policy director of the Immigrant Legal Resource Center.
"Aggressive" denaturalization is at odds with "constitutional principles of citizenship," Cassandra Burke Robertson and Irina D. Manta, law professors at Case Western University and Hofstra Law School, respectively, said at MSNBC. There is an unsavory history: "Denaturalization was relatively rare" for most of American history but "spiked during the Red Scare era." The Supreme Court in the 1960s limited denaturalization to those who had "illegally procured" citizenship through fraud or failing to meet naturalization requirements. Going beyond that represents the sort of "arbitrary governmental authority the Constitution was designed to prevent."
Pursuing denaturalization in civil courts lets the Trump administration paint potential deportees as "criminal" while "avoiding the safeguards of an actual criminal court," said Rafia Zakaria at The Nation. There is no statute of limitation on civil denaturalizations, allowing Justice Department lawyers to "target U.S. citizens who were naturalized decades earlier." But there is more than citizenship at stake: The threat of denaturalization will allow the Trump administration to tamp down on dissent from migrant citizens "who know that they could either face deportation or massive debt" from attorneys' fees. Either way, the "Trump administration wins."
Republicans already have a political target for denaturalization: Uganda-born Zohran Mamdani, the New York City mayoral candidate. Rep. Andy Ogles (R-Tenn.) has called on the Justice Department to strip Mamdani of citizenship, said Semafor. Mamdani's membership in the Democratic Socialists of America "would have disqualified him" from citizenship because it is a "communist organization," Ogles said. If those claims are "true, it's something that should be investigated," said White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt. Mamdani was defiant in response. New York is "my home," he said on X. "And I'm proud to be a citizen, which means standing up for our Constitution."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Fox News
9 minutes ago
- Fox News
Pro-life group 'elated' after Planned Parenthood shutters Houston facilities: 'Tremendous victory'
EXCLUSIVE: A pro-life group is celebrating a "tremendous victory" after Planned Parenthood announced two of its facilities in Houston, Texas, will be shutting down this fall, as Republican lawmakers continue to target the organization. In an exclusive interview with Fox News Digital, 40 Days for Life CEO and founder Shawn Carney, a Houston resident, expressed "both personal and professional elation" at the shuttering of the facilities, including the 78,000-square-foot clinic that he said was the largest abortion facility in the Western Hemisphere. "This is massive news for the pro-life movement and shows the direction that Planned Parenthood is going, which is down," Carney said. Planned Parenthood Gulf Coast — which runs six clinics in the Houston area and two in Louisiana — will close its Prevention Park and Southwest centers on Sept. 30, while the other Houston facilities will be acquired by the organization's largest Texas affiliate. This comes amid several closures of Planned Parenthood facilities in various states, including New York, where the organization is selling its only Manhattan health center building for $39 million. Facilities in GOP-led states with abortion restrictions, including Texas, have also been forced to cease procedures following the 2022 Supreme Court decision that overturned Roe V. Wade and sent decisions regarding abortion back to the states. "Now they are closing the largest abortion facility in the world," Carney said. "Their flagship. They're very proud of it in Houston, Texas. They're finally closing it, and it's unbelievable." The company cited rising costs, staffing shortages and low reimbursement rates as the reasons for closing the two Houston facilities. GOP officials in recent years have made repeated attempts to shut down Planned Parenthood, even after nearly all abortions were banned under Texas law. The Trump administration has sought to impose funding cuts to Planned Parenthood that could lead to the closure of additional facilities. A provision in a GOP-backed bill would end Medicaid payments for one year to abortion providers that received more than $800,000 from the program in 2023. A judge granted a preliminary injunction earlier this week blocking the government from cutting Medicaid payments to Planned Parenthood member organizations that either do not provide abortions or did not meet a threshold of at least $800,000 in Medicaid reimbursements in a given year. Carney said 40 Days for Life has prayed and held vigils outside the Houston mega-facility since 2006. "Countless people have gone out, offered alternatives. We've had pro-life buses outside to do free ultrasounds. There have been so many lives saved, but to be honest, it just seemed like they were Goliath and it didn't matter if we were David," he said, adding that the "behemoth" facility even provided late-term abortions at one point. "They were just going to always be open and always be victorious." Carney described the closing of the facilities as a "tremendous victory" for the pro-life movement and said it represents "one of the biggest victories that we've had" following the overturning of Roe v. Wade. "Planned Parenthood has always been very top-heavy in D.C., and that's been a weakness for the pro-life movement. But once [the court] sent it back to the states, it was sending it back to the place where the pro-life movement was the strongest, which was the grassroots," he said. The closure of the two Houston facilities shows "more than anything else" that "the pro-life movement is built for a post-Roe America," Carney said, adding that Planned Parenthood is not a "monster that can't go away." "They are very, very vulnerable. When you look at the New York closing and the Houston closing, this is what that represents. All the nonsense about other services and serving women and helping low-income women. Because when you take away abortions or you offer alternatives, they close, and they close their most prosperous locations," he said.
Washington Post
39 minutes ago
- Washington Post
Pope Leo reflects on migrants and refugees as ‘messengers of hope'
Pope Leo XIV urged the public to see migrants and refugees as 'messengers of hope' on Friday, as the Trump administration focuses on mass deportation efforts in the pontiff's former home country. In a letter, Leo wrote that the 'widespread tendency to look after the interests of limited communities' poses a serious threat to the 'pursuit of the common good and global solidarity for the benefit of our entire human family.'
Associated Press
an hour ago
- Associated Press
How views of the Supreme Court have changed since 2022 abortion ruling, according to AP-NORC polling
WASHINGTON (AP) — Americans' views of the Supreme Court have moderated somewhat since the court's standing dropped sharply after its ruling overturning Roe v. Wade in 2022, according to a new poll. But concern that the court has too much power is rising, fueled largely by Democrats. The survey from The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research found that about a third of U.S. adults have 'hardly any confidence at all' in the court, but that's down from 43% three years ago. As the new AP-NORC polling tracker shows, about half of Americans have 'only some confidence' in the court, up from 39% in July 2022, while a relatively small number, about 1 in 5, have 'a great deal of confidence,' which hasn't shifted meaningfully in the past few years. The moderate increase in confidence is driven by Republicans and independents. Still, views of the nation's highest court remain more negative than they were as recently as early 2022, before the high-profile ruling that overturned the constitutional right to abortion. An AP-NORC poll conducted in February 2022 found that only around one-quarter of Americans had hardly any confidence in the court's justices. Persistent divide between Republicans and Democrats The partisan divide has been persistent and stark, particularly since the Dobbs ruling, when Democrats' confidence in the nine justices plummeted. The survey shows Republicans are happier than Democrats and independents with the conservative-dominated court, which includes three justices appointed by President Donald Trump, a Republican. Few Republicans, just 8%, view the court dimly, down from about 1 in 5 in July 2022. For independents, the decline was from 45% just after the Dobbs ruling to about 3 in 10 now. The views among Democrats were more static, but they are also slightly less likely to have low confidence in the justices, falling from 64% in summer 2022 to 56% now. In recent years, the court has produced historic victories for Republican policy priorities. The justices overturned Roe, leading to abortion bans in many Republican-led states, ended affirmative action in college admissions, expanded gun rights, restricted environmental regulations and embraced claims of religious discrimination. Many of the court's major decisions from this year are broadly popular, according to a Marquette Law School poll conducted in July. But other polling suggests that most don't think the justices are ruling neutrally. A recent Fox News poll found that about 8 in 10 registered voters think partisanship plays a role in the justices' decisions either 'frequently' or 'sometimes.' Last year, the conservative majority endorsed a robust view of presidential immunity and allowed Trump to avoid a criminal trial on election interference charges. In recent months, the justices on the right handed Trump a string of victories, including a ruling that limits federal judges' power to issue nationwide injunctions. Katharine Stetson, a self-described constitutional conservative from Paradise, Nevada, said she is glad that the court has reined in 'the rogue judges, the district judges around the country' who have blocked some Trump initiatives. Stetson, 79, said she is only disappointed it took so long. 'Finally. Why did they allow it get out of hand?' she said. Growing concerns the court is too powerful Several recent decisions were accompanied by stinging dissents from liberal justices who complained the court was giving Trump too much leeway and taking power for itself. 'Perhaps the degradation of our rule-of-law regime would happen anyway. But this court's complicity in the creation of a culture of disdain for lower courts, their rulings, and the law (as they interpret it) will surely hasten the downfall of our governing institutions, enabling our collective demise,' Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson wrote when the court ruled on nationwide injunctions. The July AP-NORC poll found a growing similar sentiment. About 4 in 10 U.S. adults now say the court has 'too much' power in the way the federal government operates these days. In April, about 3 in 10 people were concerned about the court's power. The shift is largely due to movement among Democrats, rising from about one-third in April to more than half now. Debra A. Harris, a 60-year-old retired state government worker who now lives in Winter Haven, Florida, said the court's decisions in recent years 'just disgust me to my soul.' Harris said the court has changed in recent years, with the addition of the three justices appointed by Trump. 'I find so much of what they're doing is based so much on the ideology of the Republican ticket,' Harris said, singling out last year's immunity decision. 'We don't have kings. We don't have dictators.' George Millsaps, who flew military helicopters and served in Iraq, said the justices should have stood up to Trump in recent months, including on immigration, reducing the size of the federal workforce and unwinding the Education Department. 'But they're bowing down, just like Congress apparently is now, too,' said Millsaps, a 67-year-old resident of Floyd County in rural southwest Virginia. ___ The AP-NORC poll of 1,437 adults was conducted July 10-14, using a sample drawn from NORC's probability-based AmeriSpeak Panel, which is designed to be representative of the U.S. population. The margin of sampling error for adults overall is plus or minus 3.6 percentage points.
