The Trumpler administration plans to revoke citizenship from naturalized individuals on the grounds of ‘willful misrepresentation.’ This means that if someone obtained U.S. citizenship through an (fake!) asylum claim during the Obama era—and now openly aligns with MAGA-tard rhetoric—it may be in their best interest to remain discreet and hope no one comes forward with information.

हान्यो नि आफ्नै खुट्टामा बन्चरो?!

Interestingly, the government is pursuing these denaturalization cases as civil matters rather than criminal, which significantly lowers the burden of proof and makes them much easier to win in court.

Details 👉🏽 https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-s-doj-issues-memo-on-plan-to-strip-citizenship-from-some-naturalized-americans/ar-AA1HImEj?ocid=BingNewsSerp

Stay low…don’t get snitched 😂

The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) under President Trump issued a memo on June 11, 2025, directing its Civil Division to prioritize denaturalization of naturalized U.S. citizens in certain cases. This memo expands the scope of denaturalization, a process to revoke citizenship from naturalized Americans, beyond its historically limited use. Below is an explanation of who may fall under this group based on the memo’s criteria, as reported in recent sources.
Who Falls Under This Group?
The DOJ memo outlines specific categories of naturalized citizens who may be targeted for denaturalization through civil proceedings. These include:
1. Individuals Who Illegally Procured Naturalization:
• Those who obtained U.S. citizenship through fraud, such as providing false statements or fraudulent documents during the naturalization process. This includes misrepresentations that directly affect eligibility, like failing to disclose prior criminal convictions or deportation orders.
2. Naturalized Citizens Convicted of Specific Crimes:
• The memo prioritizes denaturalization for those convicted of serious offenses, including:
• War crimes, genocide, or human rights abuses (e.g., extrajudicial killings or torture).
• Terrorism-related activities or ties to organized crime.
• Serious financial fraud, such as Medicaid/Medicare fraud or Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) loan fraud.
• Other crimes where the individual is deemed an “ongoing threat to the United States” or a “potential danger to national security.”
3. Individuals with Material Misrepresentations:
• Citizens who concealed material facts during naturalization, such as prior criminal history, membership in illegal groups (e.g., terrorist organizations), or undisclosed deportation orders. Even decades-old administrative errors or omissions could be scrutinized under the memo’s broader prosecutorial discretion.
4. Accused but Not Necessarily Convicted:
• The memo allows prosecutors to pursue denaturalization for individuals accused of certain crimes, even without a conviction, particularly if they are deemed a potential national security threat. This vague criterion raises concerns about overreach, as it could include pending cases or unproven allegations.
Key Details and Concerns
• Civil Proceedings: Denaturalization cases under this memo will primarily use civil litigation, which has a lower burden of proof than criminal cases, requires only a “preponderance of evidence,” and does not guarantee the right to an attorney. This makes the process faster but reduces protections for the accused.
• Historical Context: Denaturalization has historically been rare, used primarily for war criminals (e.g., Nazis) or those who committed clear immigration fraud. The Trump administration’s expansion began in its first term and has now intensified, potentially affecting millions of the estimated 25 million naturalized U.S. citizens.
• Example Case: On June 13, 2025, a federal judge revoked the citizenship of Elliott Duke, a UK-born U.S. military veteran, for concealing a conviction related to child sexual abuse material during naturalization. This case is seen as a precedent for the new policy.
• Legal and Ethical Concerns: Critics, including immigration attorneys and legal scholars like Cassandra Robertson, argue that the policy risks violating due process and 14th Amendment rights, potentially creating a “two-tiered” citizenship system that disproportionately targets foreign-born citizens. The broad discretion given to prosecutors and the lack of legal counsel in civil cases heighten fears of abuse and racial profiling.
Broader Implications
• The memo aligns with the Trump administration’s broader immigration agenda, including mass deportation efforts and restrictions on birthright citizenship.
• Immigration advocates warn that the policy could erode trust in the naturalization process and create uncertainty for naturalized citizens, even those who have been U.S. citizens for decades.
• The Supreme Court’s recent ruling limiting nationwide injunctions may facilitate the implementation of such policies, though legal challenges continue.
Conclusion
Naturalized U.S. citizens at risk of denaturalization under this DOJ memo include those who obtained citizenship through fraud or misrepresentation, as well as those convicted of or accused of serious crimes like war crimes, terrorism, or financial fraud.

DOES FAKE ASYLEES WHO OBTAINED GREENCARD WITH FAKE MISREPRESENTATION AND DOCUMENTS IN THE PAST FALL UNDER THIS GROUP?

Yes, a fake asylee who acquired a green card and subsequently obtained U.S. citizenship through naturalization could fall under the group targeted by the DOJ memo issued on June 11, 2025, for potential denaturalization. Here’s why:
Relevant Criteria from the DOJ Memo
The memo prioritizes denaturalization for naturalized U.S. citizens who:
1. Illegally Procured Naturalization: This includes individuals who obtained citizenship through fraud or material misrepresentation during the naturalization process. If someone falsely claimed asylum to secure a green card and later naturalized, this could be considered fraud or misrepresentation, as their initial immigration status (asylee) was obtained under false pretenses.
2. Concealed Material Facts: If the individual failed to disclose during the naturalization process that their asylum claim was fraudulent (e.g., fabricated persecution or false documents), this would constitute a material misrepresentation. Such omissions could directly affect their eligibility for citizenship, as naturalization requires lawful admission to the U.S. as a permanent resident.
3. Potential National Security or Public Safety Concerns: If the fraudulent asylum claim is linked to activities deemed a “potential danger to national security” or an “ongoing threat to the United States,” the memo’s broad discretion allows prosecutors to pursue denaturalization, even without a criminal conviction.
How This Applies to a Fake Asylee
• Fraudulent Asylum to Green Card: If an individual obtained asylum by submitting false claims, documents, or testimony (e.g., fabricating persecution or identity), their green card (lawful permanent resident status) would be based on fraud. Since naturalization requires a valid green card, any fraud in the asylum process could taint the entire immigration history, making their citizenship vulnerable to revocation.
• Civil Denaturalization Process: The DOJ memo emphasizes civil proceedings, which have a lower burden of proof (preponderance of evidence) than criminal cases. Evidence of a fraudulent asylum claim, such as inconsistencies in applications, false documents, or testimony, could suffice to initiate denaturalization without requiring a criminal conviction.
• Examples and Precedents: While specific cases of fake asylees are not detailed in the provided sources, cases like that of Elliott Duke (denaturalized for concealing a criminal conviction) illustrate how concealing material facts during naturalization can lead to citizenship revocation. A fake asylee’s fraud would similarly undermine the legality of their naturalization.
Key Considerations
• Scope of Investigation: The DOJ’s focus includes reviewing immigration files for fraud or misrepresentation, which could uncover fake asylum claims from years prior, even if the individual has been a citizen for decades.
• Risk of Broad Application: The memo’s vague criteria (e.g., “potential danger”) could lead to overreach, where even minor misrepresentations in asylum applications are used to justify denaturalization, especially if prosecutors prioritize high-profile or politically motivated cases.
• Legal Consequences: If denaturalized, the individual would revert to their prior immigration status (e.g., permanent resident or undocumented, depending on their case). If their green card was also fraudulently obtained, they could face deportation proceedings.
Conclusion
A fake asylee who acquired a green card through fraud and later naturalized is highly likely to fall under the group targeted by the DOJ memo, as their citizenship could be deemed illegally procured due to fraud or material misrepresentation. The memo’s emphasis on civil denaturalization and broad prosecutorial discretion increases this risk. For further details, you can refer to sources like The Guardian or NPR discussing the memo’s implications.

Yes, a fake asylee who acquired a green card and subsequently obtained U.S. citizenship through naturalization could fall under the group targeted by the DOJ memo issued on June 11, 2025, for potential denaturalization. Here’s why:
Relevant Criteria from the DOJ Memo
The memo prioritizes denaturalization for naturalized U.S. citizens who:
1. Illegally Procured Naturalization: This includes individuals who obtained citizenship through fraud or material misrepresentation during the naturalization process. If someone falsely claimed asylum to secure a green card and later naturalized, this could be considered fraud or misrepresentation, as their initial immigration status (asylee) was obtained under false pretenses.
2. Concealed Material Facts: If the individual failed to disclose during the naturalization process that their asylum claim was fraudulent (e.g., fabricated persecution or false documents), this would constitute a material misrepresentation. Such omissions could directly affect their eligibility for citizenship, as naturalization requires lawful admission to the U.S. as a permanent resident.
3. Potential National Security or Public Safety Concerns: If the fraudulent asylum claim is linked to activities deemed a “potential danger to national security” or an “ongoing threat to the United States,” the memo’s broad discretion allows prosecutors to pursue denaturalization, even without a criminal conviction.
How This Applies to a Fake Asylee
• Fraudulent Asylum to Green Card: If an individual obtained asylum by submitting false claims, documents, or testimony (e.g., fabricating persecution or identity), their green card (lawful permanent resident status) would be based on fraud. Since naturalization requires a valid green card, any fraud in the asylum process could taint the entire immigration history, making their citizenship vulnerable to revocation.
• Civil Denaturalization Process: The DOJ memo emphasizes civil proceedings, which have a lower burden of proof (preponderance of evidence) than criminal cases. Evidence of a fraudulent asylum claim, such as inconsistencies in applications, false documents, or testimony, could suffice to initiate denaturalization without requiring a criminal conviction.
• Examples and Precedents: While specific cases of fake asylees are not detailed in the provided sources, cases like that of Elliott Duke (denaturalized for concealing a criminal conviction) illustrate how concealing material facts during naturalization can lead to citizenship revocation. A fake asylee’s fraud would similarly undermine the legality of their naturalization.
Key Considerations
• Scope of Investigation: The DOJ’s focus includes reviewing immigration files for fraud or misrepresentation, which could uncover fake asylum claims from years prior, even if the individual has been a citizen for decades.
• Risk of Broad Application: The memo’s vague criteria (e.g., “potential danger”) could lead to overreach, where even minor misrepresentations in asylum applications are used to justify denaturalization, especially if prosecutors prioritize high-profile or politically motivated cases.
• Legal Consequences: If denaturalized, the individual would revert to their prior immigration status (e.g., permanent resident or undocumented, depending on their case). If their green card was also fraudulently obtained, they could face deportation proceedings.
Conclusion
A fake asylee who acquired a green card through fraud and later naturalized is highly likely to fall under the group targeted by the DOJ memo, as their citizenship could be deemed illegally procured due to fraud or material misrepresentation. The memo’s emphasis on civil denaturalization and broad prosecutorial discretion increases this risk. For further details, you can refer to sources like The Guardian or NPR discussing the memo’s implications.

Students especially from texas from 2008-2019 have submitted fake documents and fake misinterpretationamd infos. Cities like sanfrancisco, LA, NYC residing nepalese should be targeted.

84 ko chunab agadi farkaye hune sab lai. Yo pali 3 dal lai dhosta parera harauna parcha. Nepal ko nagarikta lera voters ID lera basna parcha sabai Nepali le.