(MINNESOTA) — Federal officials are signaling a sharp expansion of denaturalization efforts as fraud investigations in Minnesota widen, putting renewed legal attention on when the government can strip citizenship from naturalized Americans.
In recent public comments, the Trump administration confirmed it is considering denaturalization in connection with Minnesota fraud prosecutions. White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said on Dec. 31, 2025 that the administration is “not afraid to use denaturalization,” calling it a tool the administration is “looking at … right now.”
Separately, USCIS leadership has framed fraud enforcement as a central agency mission. USCIS Director Joseph B. Edlow said in a Sept. 30, 2025 press release tied to Operation Twin Shield that USCIS would “relentlessly pursue” those who undermine immigration laws. USCIS spokesman Matthew J. Tragesser added on Dec. 18, 2025 that USCIS is prioritizing referrals for those allegedly “lying or misrepresenting themselves during the naturalization process.”
Why this matters legally: citizenship is secure — but not absolute for some
U.S. citizenship is generally permanent, but naturalized citizens can lose it through denaturalization when the government proves the person was not legally entitled to naturalize.
The government’s theory in fraud-linked cases often tracks two concepts:
– Illegal procurement (the person never qualified to naturalize), and
– Material misrepresentation (false statements or omissions that mattered to the naturalization decision).
Under INA § 340, the federal government may file a civil denaturalization lawsuit in federal district court to revoke a naturalization order and cancel a certificate of naturalization. In addition, some criminal convictions can lead to denaturalization as part of a criminal case under 18 U.S.C. § 1425, with related immigration consequences.
A major legal flashpoint is the government’s emphasis on “good moral character,” a statutory requirement for most naturalization applicants under INA § 316(a). Practically, USCIS and DOJ may argue that undisclosed fraud, false testimony, or disqualifying conduct during the statutory period meant the applicant never qualified.
The Supreme Court has emphasized materiality standards in denaturalization-related contexts, including Maslenjak v. United States, 582 U.S. 335 (2017), which generally requires a meaningful connection between a false statement and the decision to grant citizenship in criminal denaturalization prosecutions.
Warning: Denaturalization is usually not triggered by minor paperwork mistakes alone. But inconsistent answers, undisclosed arrests, or false statements can become central if the government alleges they were material.
Minnesota investigations drive public and policy pressure
Federal authorities estimate up to $9 billion in losses tied to fraud across multiple Minnesota public programs. The “Feeding Our Future” prosecutions remain a focal point, with dozens convicted in a scheme involving approximately $250 million. Officials say newer investigations involve child care and disability service fraud.
Two large enforcement initiatives have amplified attention:
– Operation Twin Shield (Sept. 19–28, 2025) reportedly reviewed more than 1,000 cases and identified suspected fraud indicators such as sham marriages and fake death certificates.
– Operation Metro Surge (Dec. 1, 2025–present) has produced hundreds of arrests in Minnesota, according to DHS officials, adding to local concern about aggressive enforcement tactics and community spillover.
The political dispute is also fueling legal uncertainty. Minnesota leaders, including Gov. Tim Walz and Rep. Ilhan Omar, have argued that denaturalization rhetoric risks stigmatizing the Somali-American community (estimated at about 80,000 in the state), and may chill lawful civic participation. Federal officials respond that denaturalization is aimed at fraud and misrepresentation, not a community.
A reported surge in referrals could reshape the playing field
One of the most consequential claims in the current debate is operational rather than rhetorical: internal USCIS guidance reportedly directs field offices to refer 100–200 denaturalization cases per month to DOJ in FY 2026. If accurate, that would represent a dramatic increase from historical levels.
Even if only a fraction of referrals become filed cases, the volume could affect how naturalized citizens assess risk. Denaturalization cases are document-heavy and often turn on old records:
– immigration filings,
– benefit applications,
– marriage histories,
– criminal dispositions, and
– prior statements to federal or state agencies.
Deadline/Timing Note: There is no single “statute of limitations” that protects all naturalized citizens from civil denaturalization. Timing rules can differ for related criminal charges and removal proceedings. Ask counsel about time limits in your jurisdiction.
What happens if citizenship is revoked?
If denaturalization is ordered, the person typically reverts to the status held before naturalization—often lawful permanent residence—unless the government also proves that status was obtained unlawfully.
In many cases, denaturalization is followed by removal proceedings in immigration court (EOIR). At that stage, the person may face deportation defenses that do not exist while they remain a U.S. citizen.
For families, denaturalization can trigger cascading questions:
– derivative citizenship for children,
– passport validity, and
– whether a prior petition for relatives remains valid.
Outcomes are highly fact-specific.
Warning: Travel can become risky for someone under investigation. An arrest, indictment, or pending immigration action may lead to detention or extra screening at ports of entry.
Practical guidance for naturalized citizens in Minnesota and beyond
Immigration lawyers say the safest approach is preventive and records-based. Recommended steps include:
- Request your immigration file.
– File a FOIA request to USCIS to see what the government has in your A-file and naturalization record.
2. Do not guess on forms or interviews.
– If contacted by agents, you can ask for counsel before answering detailed questions.
3. Collect certified dispositions.
– If you have any arrest history, obtain court-certified records showing the final result.
4. Screen for materiality risk.
– An attorney can assess whether any past statement could be argued material under current denaturalization standards.
Official updates may appear through USCIS press channels and DOJ’s Minnesota U.S. Attorney’s Office site:
– USCIS Newsroom
– U.S. Attorney’s Office District of Minnesota
⚖️ Legal Disclaimer: This article provides general information about immigration law and is not legal advice. Immigration cases are highly fact-specific, and laws vary by jurisdiction. Consult a qualified immigration attorney for advice about your specific situation.
Resources
– AILA Lawyer Referral
Federal authorities are significantly increasing denaturalization actions in Minnesota, linked to billion-dollar fraud probes. Under INA § 340, the government can revoke citizenship for material misrepresentation or illegal procurement. With operations like Twin Shield identifying over 1,000 suspect cases, USCIS aims to refer hundreds of cases monthly to the DOJ, raising significant legal concerns for the state’s naturalized communities and shifting the enforcement landscape for 2026.
