(NORTH MIAMI, FLORIDA) — The U.S. Department of Justice filed a civil lawsuit in Miami federal court last week seeking to strip former North Miami mayor Philippe Bien-Aime of his U.S. citizenship and cancel the documents that flowed from it, a step that would also require him to surrender his U.S. passport and related papers.
Federal lawyers accused Bien-Aime, described in the complaint as a Haitian national, of obtaining citizenship through fraud and misrepresentation that stretched across decades and multiple stages of the immigration system. The lawsuit asks a judge to revoke his citizenship, cancel his naturalization certificate, and order the surrender of his U.S. passport and related documents.
At the center of the case sits a paper trail the government says began with a false entry into the United States and continued through a lawful permanent residence application and a naturalization interview. The Justice Department alleges Bien-Aime entered the U.S. using a false passport with someone else’s photo, lied about his identity for 30 years, committed bigamy to gain legal status, and provided false statements on immigration forms and under oath during his green card and naturalization processes, leading to his citizenship oath in 2006.
USCIS plays a central role in the denaturalization process for Philippe Bien-Aime, the former mayor of North Miami, by investigating and documenting fraud in his original naturalization application, which the government says forms the basis for the Justice Department’s lawsuit. The case has drawn attention locally because it targets a former elected official, and nationally because denaturalization is among the most severe civil remedies in immigration law.
Unlike many immigration actions that start and finish inside an agency, denaturalization proceeds in federal court through a civil lawsuit brought by the Justice Department, not through an administrative “USCIS cancellation.” USCIS’s work typically comes earlier, when the agency reviews naturalization records, identifies alleged fraud or concealment, develops evidence, and makes referrals that can later land in court.
Federal immigration law gives the government a pathway to pursue denaturalization when it believes citizenship was obtained through deception that mattered to the decision to grant it. USCIS’s involvement in cases like this rests on the authority in INA § 340(a), which allows denaturalization when citizenship was obtained by concealment of a material fact or willful misrepresentation.
The government says cases can surface in several ways after a person becomes a citizen, including audits, record checks, tips, or discrepancies discovered in naturalization files. When investigators conclude information was concealed or misstated in a way that could have changed the outcome, USCIS can assemble records and evidence for a referral, while the Justice Department decides whether to sue.
In Bien-Aime’s case, the Justice Department’s complaint sets out allegations tied to identity, entry, and statements made during immigration proceedings, including under oath, as well as allegations involving marriage history that include a bigamy claim. The denaturalization process, if it advances, turns on what the court finds after litigation, not on the filing itself.
The government’s request in the lawsuit lays out a cascading set of consequences that extend beyond the word “citizenship” on paper. Along with revocation of citizenship, the Justice Department seeks cancellation of the naturalization certificate and an order requiring surrender of a U.S. passport and related documents, reflecting how a court judgment in denaturalization can unwind benefits and proofs that come with naturalization.
Denaturalization has also become more visible in policy debates because it sits at the intersection of immigration screening and later enforcement, and because it depends on proving the kind of misrepresentation that the law treats as material. The case against Bien-Aime, the government says, reflects a focus on alleged fraud and the use of civil court to undo a grant of citizenship, rather than an agency-level reopening that ends with an internal decision.
The Justice Department linked the posture of this case to broader enforcement direction, citing a Trump administration directive through a Justice Department Civil Division memo from last year. The memo, the government says, instructs prioritizing denaturalization for fraud cases deemed “sufficiently important,” alongside terrorism, espionage, or war crimes.
Even with such directives, denaturalization remains a targeted remedy that requires a civil lawsuit and a federal judge’s order, rather than a routine response to every suspected discrepancy in an old file. Lawyers who follow the area have also emphasized in public debate that the court-driven nature of the denaturalization process matters, because allegations alone do not decide the outcome, and the government still must prove its case through evidence and litigation.
The government’s account places Bien-Aime within a category of cases where officials say they uncovered significant inconsistencies after naturalization, triggering review of the original record and the steps that led to citizenship. In explaining USCIS’s role, the government has framed the agency as the investigator and record-builder, while the Justice Department acts as the litigating arm that asks a federal court to revoke citizenship under INA § 340(a).
Historically, denaturalization has been rare compared with the overall number of people who become U.S. citizens each year, with an average of 11 cases annually from the 1990s to 2017. The Justice Department’s activity increased during the first Trump term, and the American Immigration Lawyers Association has warned that broad priorities could risk targeting non-criminal cases, even as the government emphasizes fraud and national security-related categories.
The case also arrives amid ongoing policy interest in using denaturalization as an enforcement tool, including steps within the Department of Homeland Security to propose rules to prioritize such enforcement. Still, the government has not identified a specific USCIS policy memo number or effective date as controlling this individual case, keeping the focus on the complaint’s allegations and the civil-court pathway.
As of February 2026, the lawsuit remained in its early stages and no reported court rulings had been issued. Bien-Aime’s attorney, Peterson St. Philippe, stated the matter should be resolved through legal channels.
Uscis Moves to Denaturalize Philippe Bien-Aime in Immigration Review
The Justice Department is seeking to denaturalize former North Miami Mayor Philippe Bien-Aime, alleging he built his U.S. residency on a foundation of fraud. The complaint cites false identity use and bigamy spanning thirty years. Because citizenship is a fundamental right, the government must prove its case in federal court. This case reflects increased federal focus on revoking citizenship for material misrepresentation.
