The Trump administration intends to increase its efforts to strip some naturalised Americans of their US citizenship, according to internal guidance obtained by The New York Times.

The move comes as US President Donald Trump, in a prime-time address, pledged to further intensify his hard-line immigration policies, signalling a broader crackdown on migrants and stricter enforcement measures across the country.

Internal instructions issued this week to US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) field offices direct them to “supply Office of Immigration Litigation with 100–200 denaturalisation cases per month” in the 2026 fiscal year, the Times reported.

That would mark a dramatic increase in denaturalisation cases, which, according to the Immigrant Legal Resource Centre, stood at about 11 per year between 1990 and 2017.

A USCIS spokesperson told Reuters that the agency’s focus was on individuals who “unlawfully obtained US citizenship”, asserting that the expanded denaturalisation push forms part of efforts to combat immigration fraud.

In the US, the government can revoke the US citizenship of a naturalised citizen for various criminal and security issues.

Denaturalisation cases are civil actions filed in federal court and historically have been pursued sparingly.

Under US law, denaturalisation can occur only in specific circumstances — principally when citizenship was “illegally procured” or gained by fraud or misrepresentation during the naturalisation process.

The timeline for denaturalisation cases varies, but they can take years to resolve.

Trump’s remarks on immigration

In his rapid-fire address at the White House, Trump reinforced his administration’s broader immigration agenda, touching on economic and other policy themes, with immigration a recurring emphasis.

While not unveiling new immigration measures during the speech itself, he continued longstanding attacks on US border policy and blamed his predecessors for what he described as national security and social challenges.

In early December, Trump told reporters that he would “absolutely” denaturalise some US citizens if he had the authority to do so — specifically citing what he characterised as “criminals that came into our country and … were naturalised maybe through [Joe] Biden or somebody that didn’t know what they were doing”.

Trump also has used strong language about current and prospective immigrants, saying “we don’t want those people” when discussing certain asylum seekers and signalling that asylum decisions could be paused “for a long time”.

These comments come in the wake of a deadly shooting in Washington involving an Afghan national who had been granted asylum earlier this year, which the administration has cited in defence of tightening immigration controls.

Earlier this month, Trump announced on social media that his administration would “permanently pause migration from all Third World Countries” and promised measures to remove immigrants he labelled as security risks or burdens on federal benefits systems.

Earlier this week, Trump also added seven additional countries to a full travel ban list and imposed partial restrictions on several more, continuing a broader crackdown on entry from nations it deems to have deficient vetting systems.

Broader immigration enforcement

The expanded denaturalisation guidance arrives amid a broader suite of immigration policies implemented by the Trump administration.

These include expanded travel bans affecting citizens of multiple countries, a halt or severe curtailment of asylum processing, and a review of green cards and immigration status for nationals from countries the administration designates as “countries of concern”.

Critics of the denaturalisation push warn that applying numerical targets to citizenship revocation — a process historically reserved for clear fraud in the naturalisation process — could politicise what should be a narrowly applied enforcement tool and inject fear into immigrant communities.

Trump’s supporters, however, argue that safeguarding the integrity of the naturalisation system is essential and that fraud should be pursued vigorously within the bounds of law.

As implementation begins, federal courts will be the ultimate arbiter of individual denaturalisation actions, and the legal and social ramifications of the policy shift are likely to be subjects of intense debate in legal, immigrant advocacy, and policy circles.

Additional input from Reuters