The Trump administration is expanding the scope of the “good moral character” requirement for immigrants applying for U.S. citizenship. A new memo from U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) instructs officers to take a broader “holistic approach” when evaluating applicants, weighing both positive and negative aspects of a person’s life in determining eligibility.
The agency said the update ensures officers look beyond the absence of misconduct to also account for positive contributions. “U.S. citizenship is the gold standard of citizenship—it should only be offered to the world’s best of the best,” USCIS spokesperson Matthew J. Tragesser said.
Concerns From Legal Experts
While the standard of good moral character has long existed in the naturalization process, immigration attorneys and academics argue that the new guidance may increase uncertainty and administrative burden.
Emily Ryo, professor of law and sociology at Duke University, said the policy could create unpredictability. “What does it mean to require that a noncitizen ‘affirmatively’ establish that they are ‘worthy’ of U.S. citizenship? What kind of documentation will noncitizens be required to provide?” she asked.
Attorney Susan Ramos added that the change effectively alters substantive requirements for naturalization “without notice and comment, just by policy.” She warned that the new approach creates a “subjective standard” with no clear benchmarks, such as how much volunteer work or community service is considered sufficient.
Expanded Grounds for Denial
The memo also introduces stricter conditions in specific areas. For example, immigrants who owe back taxes will now be required to pay them in full rather than simply enter a payment plan. The same applies to overdue child-support obligations.
In addition, repeated traffic violations, harassment, or what USCIS calls “aggressive solicitation” can now be deemed evidence of poor moral character, although the definitions remain vague.
California-based attorney Kathrin Mautino noted that the broad language makes it harder for applicants to challenge denials. “Generally, it will give individual officers more authority to ask about private lives,” she said.
The updated USCIS policy is one of several steps the administration has taken to intensify oversight of immigrants. In May, the State Department temporarily paused visa interviews for international students to increase social media vetting. That pause was later lifted, but screening for “hostile attitudes toward our citizens, culture, government, institutions, or founding principles” continues.
Earlier this week, USCIS said the same type of vetting would expand to other immigration benefits, such as work permits and residency applications.
What The Author Thinks
The idea of weighing both positive and negative attributes may sound balanced, but in practice it opens the door to subjective judgments that vary wildly between officers. Without clear rules, applicants risk having their futures decided by personal biases rather than consistent standards. It’s not unreasonable to expect immigrants to pay taxes or meet child-support obligations, but vague terms like “aggressive solicitation” or undefined expectations of volunteer work could make the process arbitrary. Instead of creating clarity, this policy risks adding more confusion and fear for people who are already navigating one of the toughest immigration systems in the world.
Featured image credit: The Yappie
For more stories like it, click the +Follow button at the top of this page to follow us.