HOUSE RESOLUTION NO. 221

Reps. MacDonell, Arbit, Weiss, Coffia, Breen, Mentzer, Paiz, Byrnes, Price, Martus, Brixie, Dievendorf, Morgan, Xiong, McKinney, Rheingans and Young offered the following resolution:

A resolution to urge the federal government to reverse course on expediting denaturalization through civil proceedings.

Whereas, Under Section 340 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. ? 1451, a United States attorney may institute civil proceedings to revoke the order naturalizing a citizen if the individual?s U.S. citizenship was ?illegally procured? or was ?procured by concealment of a material fact or by willful misrepresentation.? Notably, individuals subject to denaturalization via civil proceedings do not have a constitutional right to an attorney or to a trial by jury. The burden of proof in civil denaturalization cases is ?clear, unequivocal, and convincing evidence,? which may be a lesser standard than the ?proof beyond a reasonable doubt? required in criminal cases; and

Whereas, The United States Department of Justice released a memorandum on June 11, 2025, advising attorneys in its Civil Division to ?prioritize and maximally pursue? the civil denaturalization of naturalized citizens over various types of alleged unlawful activity. The memorandum gives the Civil Division concerningly broad latitude over which naturalized citizens to target for denaturalization and deportation, including those who have not been accused of any crime, stating in relevant part that the Division should prioritize ?[a]ny other cases referred to the Civil Division that the Division determines to be sufficiently important to pursue?; and

Whereas, Certain legal experts have warned that conducting denaturalization proceedings solely via civil litigation could be an unconstitutional violation of naturalized citizens? due process rights. The Fifth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States provides, in relevant part, that ?[n]o person shall . . . be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law . . . .? This includes both procedural due process, which requires individuals to be offered certain procedural protections if the government seeks to deprive them of a protected interest, and substantive due process, which protects fundamental rights from governmental interference. Legal experts have advised that the weaker procedural protections in civil litigation, as opposed to criminal proceedings, are constitutionally insufficient to satisfy procedural due process, and that the government?s interests in regulating naturalization and immigration can be achieved through other, more narrowly tailored means; and

Whereas, According to recent representative polling, overwhelming majorities of Americans do not support the denaturalization of naturalized citizens. In one poll, 70 percent of respondents indicated that the President should not have the power to revoke the citizenship of naturalized citizens, and in another, 64 percent of respondents expressed the opinion that the federal government should not have the power to invalidate the citizenship of naturalized citizens; and

Whereas, Civil denaturalization has the potential to be misused. Powerful elected officials, including the President of the United States and multiple members of Congress, have called for the investigation, denaturalization, or deportation of naturalized citizens simply because they express viewpoints that those in power disagree with. Any attempt on the part of the federal government to denaturalize individuals for engaging in constitutionally protected free speech is fundamentally at odds with our nation?s most sacred values; and

Whereas, In context, the Department of Justice?s decision is properly understood as part of the Trump Administration?s effort to demonize immigrants, including naturalized citizens, by associating them with criminality, when, in fact, naturalized citizens commit crimes at lower rates than native-born citizens. Given the wide latitude granted to U.S. Attorneys in this memorandum, the Department of Justice does not seem to be focused on improving public safety. Rather, the purpose of this policy seems to be communicating that naturalized citizens are not welcome in the United States; and

Whereas, Michigan is home to over 400,000 naturalized citizens who are valued members of our state. Many naturalized citizens work and pay taxes for years, or even decades, before attaining their citizenship, making significant contributions to our economy and culture. Meaningful numbers of Michigan?s immigrants work in sectors of the workforce suffering from chronic worker shortages, such as healthcare. Naturalized citizens play a key role in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) research and development, which is essential for sustaining Michigan?s global competitiveness, and many companies important to the United States were founded by immigrants. Our naturalized citizens should not have to live their lives with a cloud of uncertainty hanging over them, plagued by fears of civil denaturalization proceedings that could be brought at any time and for any reason, including political reasons; and

Whereas, Naturalized citizenship is not second-class citizenship. Once attained, it is not a privilege that can be revoked arbitrarily or capriciously. Naturalized citizens have the same constitutional rights as native-born citizens, including the right to receive due process before being deprived of life, liberty, or property; now, therefore, be it

Resolved by the House of Representatives, That we urge the federal government to reverse course on expediting denaturalization through civil proceedings; and be it further

Resolved, That copies of this resolution be transmitted to the President of the United States, the Attorney General of the United States, the United States Secretary of State, and the members of the Michigan congressional delegation.