The Trump administration is pursuing a denaturalization quota of between 1,200 and 2,400 cases per year, a small share of the U.S. naturalized population but one that immigration lawyers warn could reshape how tens of millions of Americans view their citizenship.

In fiscal year 2024, the United States naturalized roughly 800,000 people, a figure cited by NPR host Steve Inskeep during an interview with Northern Virginia-based immigration attorney Mariam Masumi Daud. The administration's proposed quota represents a fraction of that annual intake, yet Daud warned the symbolic damage could be far larger.

"I think a quota is something that's going to have a chilling effect, especially on eligible immigrants who may want to apply for citizenship," Daud said. "This really pulls away USCIS agency resources from its core functions."

The plan would divert U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services staff toward revocation cases, potentially creating backlogs across other immigration categories, she added.

What does the quota change?

Until now, federal authorities have used denaturalization sparingly, generally against individuals whose naturalization papers rested on fraud or serious misrepresentation. A numerical target, Daud argued, risks turning an exceptional remedy into routine enforcement.

"It is traditionally something that's used in rare cases and in extreme situations. It is not something that's been meant to be used in a sweeping way."

She added: "Citizenship is something that's really supposed to be secure. And a policy that emphasizes denaturalization by having quotas and having this high volume really risks creating more of a two-tier system of citizenship, where naturalized Americans might feel…conditionally American, and that's a problem."

Who is most exposed?

The administration's reported focus includes applicants whose N-400 naturalization forms addressed "good moral character" and attachment to the U.S. Constitution. Daud said those subjective standards could be applied retroactively to target individuals based on post-naturalization conduct, including political speech or beliefs.

"Absolutely, because...one of the requirements...for somebody who's attached to the principles of the United States Constitution and the happiness of the United States. And when individuals apply for naturalization, there are many questions on the naturalization application with respect to that."

Daud pointed to cases she has defended that involved "serious problems with respect to an individual's identity and very strong allegations regarding fraud." She said expanding denaturalization beyond that factual core is what makes the policy controversial.

What about adopted citizens?

Daud addressed listeners who came to the United States as adopted minors. Under the Child Citizenship Act of 2001, a foreign-born child who enters the U.S. as a permanent resident under age 18 in the legal custody of a U.S. citizen parent automatically acquires citizenship by operation of law. Such individuals never complete the formal naturalization process, so denaturalization does not apply to them, she said.

"Individuals who are not subject to that law, who are older adoptees who have gone through naturalization might feel more concerned, but it would literally come down to whether or not there was fraud or significant problems with the way in which they were adopted."

What are the broader implications?

Daud acknowledged that the 1,200-to-2,400 case count looks small against the tens of millions of naturalized Americans. The bigger risk, she said, is cultural.

"Although, you know, the numbers here are very small, the broader implications are that individuals will really feel anxiety and unsafe about whether or not their citizenship is going to be intact. And I think that's really the big problem here."

Applicants considering naturalization and naturalized citizens concerned about past filings should review their N-400 paperwork and consult a qualified immigration attorney, Daud advised during the segment.