- The Justice Department filed a civil denaturalization lawsuit on October 7, 2026, against Chicago-area citizen Emmanuel Tayo Akinkunmi.
- Prosecutors allege he concealed a prior identity and an immigration exclusion order in green-card and citizenship applications.
- Akinkunmi remains a U.S. citizen unless a federal judge orders revocation; the government must meet a demanding evidence standard.
The Justice Department filed a civil denaturalization lawsuit on October 7, 2026, asking a federal court to revoke the U.S. citizenship of Emmanuel Tayo Akinkunmi, a Chicago-area man who became a citizen in 2011. Prosecutors allege he concealed an earlier identity and immigration history while seeking a second green card and later naturalization.
The history at issue includes an immigration exclusion order upheld in 1997 by the Board of Immigration Appeals. The lawsuit says Akinkunmi had already left lawful-permanent-resident status behind before that order.
Free toolSubstantial Presence Test Calculator
The government’s case turns on what Akinkunmi disclosed to immigration officials. It alleges he withheld information in applications for permanent residence and citizenship, not simply that he had abandoned a green card.
He remains a U.S. citizen while the case proceeds. The lawsuit itself does not revoke citizenship.
Prosecutors say an earlier identity went undisclosed in two applications
Akinkunmi was born in Nigeria and previously used the name Ezekiel Aremu Adetayo, according to the complaint. Under that name, prosecutors allege, he abandoned his lawful-permanent-resident status in 1993.
The immigration exclusion order followed, and the Board of Immigration Appeals upheld it in 1997. In 2000, the government says, Akinkunmi obtained another green card using the name Emmanuel Tayo Akinkunmi without revealing either his earlier identity or the exclusion proceedings.
The allegations then reach his 2010 naturalization application. Prosecutors say he denied having used another identity and denied ever facing exclusion or deportation proceedings. U.S. authorities approved the application.
Akinkunmi took the Oath of Allegiance on June 8, 2011. The complaint contends that the earlier history would have allowed immigration officials to assess his eligibility differently. It does not treat the abandoned residency status, standing alone, as the basis for taking citizenship away.
The government says he “procured his naturalization unlawfully” and “willfully misrepresented and concealed material facts in applying to naturalize.” Those are allegations for the court to decide.
Citizenship stays in place unless a federal judge orders revocation
The Immigration and Nationality Act permits a federal court to revoke naturalization if the government proves citizenship was illegally obtained or secured through concealment of a material fact or willful misrepresentation. Prosecutors must meet a clear, unequivocal, and convincing evidence standard.
A filing does not cancel a naturalization certificate. The court would have to issue an order revoking Akinkunmi’s naturalization and canceling his certificate of citizenship. Until then, he remains a citizen.
If the government wins, Akinkunmi could face separate immigration proceedings and possible removal. That outcome would require further action; it is not an automatic consequence of the lawsuit’s filing.
The Chicago case sits within a 40-person Justice Department initiative
The department’s wider effort involves 40 naturalized citizens accused of hiding criminal histories, immigration violations, identity fraud or other information prosecutors consider disqualifying. Federal courts received complaints in those cases between August 21 and October 2, 2026.
The department described that period’s filings as the largest single-period denaturalization effort of the Trump administration. Attorney General Todd Blanche called the broader campaign the “largest denaturalization effort in modern history.”
The cases span allegations involving fraudulent marriages, concealed deportation orders and visa fraud, as well as espionage and money laundering. Other accusations involve voluntary manslaughter and sexual offenses. Each claim remains subject to the relevant court proceedings.
In Akinkunmi’s case, the court must determine whether the alleged omissions were material and intentional, and whether they legally invalidate his naturalization. The government’s request seeks a judicial order, not an immediate change to his citizenship status.
