US DOJ’s Memo Prioritizing Denaturalization Cases

 

On June 11, 2025, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) issued a memorandum directing its Civil Division to prioritize the prosecution of civil denaturalization cases against certain naturalized U.S. citizens. This marks a significant development in immigration enforcement policy, signaling a more aggressive approach to revoking citizenship from naturalized citizens.

Under Section 1451(a) of Title 8 of the U.S. Code, the Department of Justice can file a civil lawsuit to take away a person’s U.S. citizenship, if that person got naturalized either illegally or by hiding important information or lying on purpose.  The recent DOJ memo is significant in several ways.

Civil Denaturalization

First, the DOJ now emphasizes civil denaturalization proceedings, which are handled in federal court and do not require a criminal conviction. This lower burden of proof (preponderance of the evidence) contrasts with criminal denaturalization, which requires proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

The DOJ encourages re-evaluation of old naturalization cases, especially where post-naturalization criminal convictions might uncover fraud or misrepresentation during the original application process.  Further, U.S. Attorneys and DOJ trial lawyers are instructed to coordinate with DHS, particularly USCIS and ICE, in identifying and litigating these cases.

Targeted Criteria for Denaturalization

The memo outlines three primary categories of individuals who may be targeted:

1. National Security Risks – Those suspected of terrorism, espionage, or other threats to U.S. security.
2. Human Rights Violators – Individuals involved in war crimes, genocide, or torture abroad.
3. Fraudulent Naturalization – Cases where applicants allegedly lied or concealed material facts during their naturalization process, such as undisclosed criminal records or immigration fraud.

Under this new policy, a broad range of cases are covered, including naturalized citizens who obtained their green cards through family-based and employment-based immigrant visa categories. Individuals who have had questionable marriages or concealed material facts regarding their marital status could be targeted.  Employment-based cases can be reopened if the bona fides of the job opportunity is questioned. USCIS has interpreted the applications of laws such as AC-21's portability provisions quite generously, but this could change under the Trump Administration.  

Individuals who committed fraud can also be targeted.  This includes: financial fraud against the United States (including Paycheck Protection Program (“PPP”) loan fraud and Medicaid/Medicare fraud); fraud against private individuals, funds, or corporations.  

Individuals who acquired naturalization through government corruption, fraud, or material misrepresentations, not otherwise addressed by another priority category.  

Affected Naturalized Citizens

The criteria listed under the DOJ memo is so broad that any naturalized citizen's case could be reopened for review.  There is also no time limit for civil denaturalization. The following individuals are likely to be targets: 

• Naturalized U.S. Citizens with past undisclosed criminal conduct, immigration violations, or misstatements on N-400 forms.

• Individuals from conflict regions where the U.S. suspects involvement in war crimes or terrorism may face revived scrutiny.

• Individuals who committed fraud or failed to disclose material facts and information in their green card and/or naturalization applications.

Final Note

Denaturalization remains a rare and legally complex process. While denaturalization is legal under 8 U.S.C. § 1451(a), courts have historically limited it to egregious cases involving clear fraud or criminality. The DOJ’s memo signals a renewed institutional focus on stripping citizenship in specific cases — especially those implicating national security or material misrepresentation. Naturalized citizens with prior legal issues should consult qualified immigration counsel to evaluate potential exposure and ensure their naturalization records are in good order.

(Immigration laws and policies change regularly.  If you have any questions regarding this article, please visit www.1visa1.com to schedule a legal consultation.)  

Change of Employer in the middle of Green Card Application Process

Phone by Anna-Tarazevich

By Paul Szeto Esq.

Change of jobs is quite common in today's job market.  One may decide or be forced to change jobs due to company down-sizing, reorganizations, better opportunities, family situations, etc. However, for foreign workers in the United States, they have more to consider in deciding whether to change employers or not.  

In the majority of cases, foreign nationals require sponsorship by a U.S. employer in order to be able to work legally in the country.  For example, a professional worker who works under the H-1B visa program requires a separate employer application for each position that they engage in. The situation becomes more complicated if they are in the middle of their green card application process.  Would the employer cancel the green card application after their departure? Can a foreign worker somehow transfer the pending case to a new employer? These are critical questions for foreign workers to consider.

The two main applications involved are the I-140 visa petition filed by the employer and the I-485 adjustment application filed by the applicant.  A job-changing employee's options largely depend on the status of each or both of these applications in the green card application process.  

The best case scenario for a foreign worker is that they have properly submitted their I-485 application, and it has been pending for at least 180 days.  In this case, the foreign worker is allowed to "port"or move the whole green card application to a new employer under section 204(j) of the INA, provided certain technical requirements are met.  The foreign worker should be able to continue with their application unless the I-140 petition was somehow subsequently revoked based on substantive reasons.  What if the I-485 was pending for less than 180 days?  It would then depend on the employer actions.  If the I-140 is ultimately approved and remains approved for 180 days, the case can go on as above. If the I-140 was withdrawn or cancelled by the employer within 180 days, then the foreign worker would not derive any benefits at all and must restart their application again.

Sometimes, an employee has to change jobs with only a pending or approved I-140 petition. In this situation, porting of the green card application to a new employer would not be possible.  However, if the I-140 petition filed by the initial employer has been approved and remains approved for at least 180 days, the employee can generally be able to keep the priority date for future applications.  Still, the ability to be able to keep one's priority date is a huge advantage, given the long waiting times for immigrant visas.  A new employer must restart the application process again, typically from PERM labor application, but the employee would be able to keep their “space in line,” so to speak.  If an employer decides to cancel or withdraw the I-140 petition after 180 days, it would not make a difference.  

Due to visa shortage, many foreign workers must wait years before they can receive their employment-based green cards.  During this lengthy application process, job changes are sometimes inevitable.  Foreign workers should always be on the lookout for possible employment changes. Careful planning and correct legal information would enable them to make the transition safely. 

(Immigration laws and policies change regularly.  If you have any questions regarding this article, please visit www.1visa1.com to schedule a legal consultation.)  

Proposal to Cancel H-1B Extensions Beyond the Normal Six Years

The Department of Homeland Security is considering new regulations to cancel the current H-1B extension requests beyond the normal six years of employment, according to a news report by the DC Bureau of the McClatchy newspaper.  If the proposal gets implemented, more than one million H-1B workers could lose their status to continue living and working the United States. 

The H-1B Visa Program was created by Congress to grant foreign high-skilled workers visa status to live and work in the United States.  The normal maximum period of employment is six years.  The spouses and children of H-1B workers may also stay with them in the U.S.  Many of these H-1B workers also apply for permanent resident status based on sponsorship by their employers.  However, due to visa backlog, many workers have to wait for long periods of time - often exceeding six years - before they may obtain a green card.

Consequently, Congress passed a law to allow these H-1B workers to extend their visa status beyond the normal six years under certain circumstances.  Specifically, the American Competitiveness in the 21st Century Act (AC21) passed by Congress in 2000 provides two mechanisms for H-1B workers to request for extension of H-1B status beyond the normal six years.  

First, Section 104(c) of AC21 authorizes approval of H-1B status beyond the six-year maximum period if an immigrant visa is unavailable to the beneficiary due to per-country cap limits in the applicable visa category. (India is the one of the most backlogged countries for employment-based visas.) Second, Section 106(b) of AC21 authorizes approval of one-year extensions of H-1B status beyond the six-year maximum period if 365 days have passed since the filing of a labor application or immigrant visa petition by an employer on behalf of the beneficiary. 

Many thousands of H-1B workers have taken advantages of the above extension rules to continue their legal employment in the United States.   The current administration is reviewing these rules for possible re-interpretation.  According to the news report by McClatchy, memos are being circulated between the heads of DHS to determine whether the administration can reinterpret the "may grant" language of AC21 so as to stop granting extensions.  Does "may" means that DHS can make decisions on these extension requests on a discretionary basis?

USCIS has not yet made any official statements on this proposal.  However, the agency has been implementing a series of policy and regulatory changes based on the President’s Buy American, Hire American Executive Order.  For examples, the wage levels of H-1B petitions have been scrutinized and green card applicants based on offer of employment are required to be interviewed.  DHS is also taking actions to cancel the current policy of allowing H-1B spouses to work in the United States. 

The potential impact of these proposed changes would be substantial and devastating.  It is estimated that more than one million H-1B workers, many of them Indians, would be affected by these changes.  Many of them have families and homes in the United States.  Strong reactions and litigation are expected from these H-1B workers and the employers if the proposal does get implemented.  

It is difficult to predict whether the administration will actually scrap the H-1B visa extension rules.  However, it is a good precautionary measure for H-1B workers to submit their extension applications as soon as possible. Under the existing policy, eligible employees may request for up to three years of extension in one application.   Hence, they should discuss and evaluate their situation with their employers and lawyers to see if extensions can be filed now. 

New I-485 Supplement Form to Verify Bona Fide Job Offer

USCIS has submitted to the OMB a new supplemental form to I-485 for review as part of the rule-making process.  The new form entitled, "Supplement J, Confirmation of Bona Fide Job Offer or Request for Job Portability Under INA Section 204(j)," is used to certify that a bona fide job offer exists to support an employment-based I-485 application to adjust status.

The new Supplement J is used in one of the following two situations:

1) If the job offer continues to the job offer made in the original approved foreign labor permanent employment certification (PERM labor application), then the employer will certify that the job offer remains unchanged and valid (despite passage of time due to visa backlog).

2) When a visa applicant seeks to port the application to another employer as a result of a new job offer, the new Supplement J is to used to establish that the requirements under INA Section 204(j) (or AC21 Section 106(c), commonly known as the job flexibility provision) are met.  

If the I-140 is filed simultaneously with the I-485, Supplement J is not required.  

In terms of legal requirements, nothing has changed.  However, the new supplement form must now be signed by both the employer and employee.  The employer must also agree to certain legal requirements such as release of relevant company records, audits, on-site compliance visits, etc.  To a certain extent, the new supplement could potentially make portability more difficult than before.

New DHS Rule Could Bring I-140 EAD to the Table

Two days ago, the DHS sent a proposed rule to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review. By law, such review is the first step for any new agency rule to take effect.   

"Retention of EB-1, EB-2, and EB-3 Immigrant Workers and Program Improvements Affecting Highly-Skilled H-1B Alien Workers," is the title of the proposed rule.  

Although the content of the rule would not be disclosed until OMB review has been complete, the title suggests that it will do something to keep employment-based green card applicants in the United States.  Specifically it targets "highly-skilled H-1B" workers who are in the EB-1, EB-2 and EB-3 visa categories.

Further, the abstract also summarizes the purposes of new rule:

1)  To provide "stability and job flexibility" for the beneficiaries of approved employment-based I-140 visa petitions while waiting to apply for permanent resident status.  

2) To conform its regulations with the American Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act of 2000 (AC21).

3) To clarify several interpretive (or legal) questions under ACWIA and AC21 regarding H-1B petitions, and promote consistency by incorporating the policies created by previous policy memos and AAO decisions. 

One may make educated guesses about the rule, which could include EAD for employees with I-140 approvals.  The new rule could also clarify the rules regarding H-1B portability and extension issues.  However, these are only guesses and speculations which should not be relied on until the new rule has been published and adopted by DHS. 

Stay tune for more updates regarding this important new rule! 

Enter your email address:

New law increases H-1B and L visa fees by $2000-$2250 for some employers

A new law recently signed by President Obama on Aug. 13, 2010 has added an additional fee for the filing of H-1B and L-1 visa petitions by certain employers.  This law affects mostly medium and large companies which employ 50 or more employees and has more than 50% of its employees who are in H-1B or L nonimmigrant visa status.  They now have to pay $2000 additional for filing an H-1B petition and $2250 additional for filing a L-1 visa petition.  The H-1B visa program is designed for U.S. employers to hire professional employees such as engineers, computer professionals and accountants for a temporary period of time.  The L-1 visa is designed for multi-national companies to transfer their executives, high-level managers and employees with specialized knowledge to work in the U.S. 

When is this new law become effective?

This new law, Public Law 111-230 became effective upon signing on August 13, 2010.  The USCIS has issued guidance that H-1B and L-1 petitions postmarked on or after Aug. 14, 2010 are subject to the new fees.  The new law will remain in effect through September 30, 2014.

Which employers must pay the new fees?

Employers with 50 or more employees in the U.S. and has more than 50% of its workforce who are in H-1B or L visa status are subject to the new fees.  The number of employees and their immigration status are determined at the time of filing. 

How much are the additional fees?

For H-1B petition, the additional fee is $2000.  For L-1A or L-1B petitions, the additional fee is $2250.  This new fee is additional to the current filing fee for the Form I-129, the fraud prevention fee, and the ACWIA fee (retraining fee).  It is recommended that a separate check be issued for the new fee.

What types of petitions are covered?

Employers who are filing an initial application for a new H-1B or L employee must pay these new fees.  This is so even if the employee is already in H-1B or L status.  Subsequent filings for extension or amendments are exempt from the new fees.

Which employees are counted in the 50/50 calculation?

All employees of a petitioning employer in the U.S. including full-time and part-time employees are counted, excluding consultants and contractors.  The USCIS in a stakeholder meeting held on 08/19/2010 opined that even L-2 dependents should be counted towards the calculation of whether or not there is 50% of employees who are in H1B/L status.

What happens to the applications that have been filed without the new fees?

The USCIS will put these petitions on hold unless it is clear from the record that they are exempt from the new fees.  If it is determined that a petition is subject to the new fee, a Request for Evidence will be issued to the employer.  Failure to respond to the RFE will result in the denial of the petition.

Who may pay the new fees?

The USCIS has stated that the employer should pay the new fees, consistent with the legislative intent behind the new law to detect and prevent fraud.

Will there be a new form designed for this new fee?
The USCIS is revising its I-129 form now. Before the new form is ready, the USCIS recommends that all petitioners either include the new fee or a statement and other evidence explaining why this new fee does not apply. Also a bold capital notation should be included at the top of the cover letter. An RFE may be required if USCIS needs additional information or evidence to determine if the new fee is required.

Protecting Immigration Status in a Challenging Economy

During the past few months, I have heard from many friends and clients who lost their jobs or otherwise faced with employment issues. The financial tsunami has wiped out millions of jobs, stalled many companies’ expansion plans and projects, and caused enormous anxiety on the minds of workers in the U.S. and other countries. The financial crises started in the U.S. and the impact has also been the greatest here. Headlines of job cuts and bankruptcies are common place in major newspapers and network channels. One of the side effects of this economic downturn is that many foreigners’ immigration status is being affected as well. This article discusses these issues and the defensive steps one should take to protect his immigration status in the U.S.

Understanding Your Situation

First and foremost, one must fully understand her immigration status in the U.S., including the visa category, as well as its restrictions and duration, etc. If a foreign national has not spoken to an immigration attorney yet, this is a good time to make an appointment to have an initial consultation. For instance, if a person is an H-1B worker, she may normally stay in the U.S. for a maximum of six years. This is assuming a petitioner has agreed to sponsor her for H-1B employment and she has properly maintained her status. A student, on the other hand, usually does not have an end date in her status. Instead, she is allowed to stay for the “duration of status”, for as long as she maintains her full-time course load of studies and pays her tuition. For her status to terminate, it normally should require an affirmative finding by the immigration officials that she has violated her status. Other visa categories such as L-1 status and B-1 status have their own restrictions.

H-1B and other Laid-Off Professionals

Perhaps, the most common non-immigrant status in the U.S. for the working professionals is the H-1B. An H-1B worker should normally only work for the sponsoring employer but not other employer. The employer must pay him the market wage as agreed upon in the Labor Condition Application. Maintaining a good performance record and always exceeding the employer’s expectations are good ways to secure one’s employment. However, no matter how hard a person tries, there is no way to stop him from being the victim of a massive layoffs or an elimination of a department. In those situations, one must think proactively to protect his status. The best solution is to look for work before one officially loses his job. Contrary to the some individuals’ belief, the USCIS does not grant any grace period for a laid-off H-1B worker to look for new employment. The best time to look for a new job is when you still have one. Always keep an eye for other opportunities.

If new employment is not on the horizon, then try to rely on a spouse’s status. For instance, one may change to H-4 status or F-2 status based on a spouse’s H-1B and F-1 status respectively. If a person has already started the green card application process, he may also be qualified for employment authorization document (EAD) issued by the USCIS. Usually, one must have filed the I-485 adjustment of status application before an EAD can be applied. Unlike H-1B employment status, an EAD issued based on a pending green card application allows the holder to work for any employer.

A laid-off worker may also attempt to change status to another visa category. For example, the F-1 student status would allow a person to stay in the U.S. for as long as he or she is studying according to the terms of the F-1 visa category. There are institutions which are able to issue the Form I-20 (Certificate of Eligibility) quickly enough to facilitate the application for change of status. Sometimes, changing to the B-2 tourist status may also be a temporary solution. It is important to note that the B-2 visa does not allow a person to engage in gainful employment in the U.S. If everything else fails, the foreigner who has lost legal status should depart the U.S. as soon as practicable to avoid negative ramifications. Normally, an out-of-status foreign would not be allowed to change or adjust immigration status. And when the person does leave the U.S. he or she would not be able to return to the U.S. for many years without a waiver.

Conclusion

The recent economic recession has caused many foreigners to lose their jobs and legal immigration status. It is very important that they understand their legal rights and restrictions and make the appropriate decisions. Usually the earlier one takes precautionary steps, the better the chance the person will have to maintain lawful status in the U.S.

USCIS further Expands Premium Processing for I-140 Petitions

(written on 2/26/2009)
By Paul Szeto, Esq.

Recently, the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) announced that it will expand Premium Processing Service for designated Forms I-140 (Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker) to include certain alien beneficiaries who have or will come to the end of their H-1B work visa status. This is a further step of the government to help foreign workers whose immigrant petitions are delayed due to the unavailability of visa numbers. Specifically, the change will allow those workers who have reached, or are reaching, their authorized stay in H-1B nonimmigrant status to employ Premium Processing Service when filing their I-40 visa petition.
Beginning March 2, 2009, alien workers who meet the following criteria will be allowed to file their I-140 visa petitions with the I-907 Premium Processing Service application:
• Are the beneficiary of a Form I-140 petition filed in a preference category that has been designated for premium processing service;
• Have reached the sixth-year statutory limitation of their H-1B stay, or will reach the end of their sixth year of H-1B stay within 60 days of filing;
• Are only eligible for a further H-1B extension under section 104(c) of the American Competitiveness in the Twenty-first Century Act of 2000 (AC21); and
• Are ineligible to extend their H-1B status under section 106(a) of AC21.
Most of the employment-based visa petitions in the first, second and third preferences (EB1, EB2 & EB3) are eligible for Premium Processing Services with the exception of the EB1 Multinational Company Executive/Manager petitions and EB2 Exceptional Alien Petitions seeking a National Interest Waiver. These last two categories of applications must still file their petitions under regular processing.

Under the current policy from June 16, 2008, only alien beneficiaries who are in H-1B nonimmigrant status at the time of filing may request premium processing for Form I-140. The new policy expanded the service to those who are not currently in H-1B status to use the service. More foreign workers will be able to benefit from this expanded service.

Premium Processing Service provides faster processing of certain employment-based petitions and applications. Specifically, USCIS mandates 15 calendar day processing time to those who choose to use this service or USCIS will refund the Premium Processing fee and the relating case will continue to receive faster processing. The 15 calendar day period will begin when a properly completed Form I-907, Request for Premium Processing Service, is received by USCIS at the correct filing address noted on the form. A fee of $1000 is also required. Within the 15 day calendar period USCIS will issue an approval notice, or where appropriate, a notice of intent to deny, a request for evidence or open an investigation for fraud or misrepresentation.

It is important to understand that Premium Processing Service merely guarantees that a decision will be made; it does not guarantee an approval or somehow increase the chances of getting an approval. Nevertheless, it has been our firm’s experience that payment of the $1000 for Premium Processing is worthwhile because of the extra attention and services that we receive. Designated group of personnel will be devoted to working on these cases. Inquiries are usually timely responded. Petitions, assuming they meet all requirements, are usually approved within a few days.

The new policy is no doubt good news for those who needed a faster approval of their I-140 petition to qualify to AC21 extension. Given the current retrogression of visa numbers, it is expected that many applicants will take advantage of this expanded services. One possible drawback, however, is that the processing of regular (non-premium) cases could be delayed as premium services might take up substantial amount of government resources. Interested applicants must carefully weigh their options and make correct decisions according to their specific situations.


(Paul Szeto, an Immigration lawyer and a former INS attorney, regularly writes on immigration issues. His contact info: 732-632-9888, www.szetolaw.com)