The U.S. government announced changes to the process for obtaining U.S. citizenship, instructing officials to more rigorously examine compliance with the “good moral character” requirement in naturalization applications.
The measure, disclosed by the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), expands evaluation criteria and is part of the administration’s efforts to restrict access to legal immigration benefits.
The new directive specifies that the “good moral character” assessment must include a broader analysis that detects not only the absence of criminal conduct stipulated in immigration law but also other behaviors and conditions.
“It must be a comprehensive evaluation of the individual’s behavior, their adherence to social norms, and their positive contributions to the community that affirmatively demonstrate good moral character,” instructs the memo sent to officers.
What is the good moral character assessment
The good moral character requirement has been part of U.S. immigration law for decades. Typically, those applying for citizenship must not have committed serious crimes or disqualifying behaviors, a list that includes offenses ranging from homicide to drug crimes or cases where an individual has been classified as a “habitual drunkard.”
Typically, after residing as lawful permanent residents for three to five years, immigrants may apply for naturalization, provided they meet the remaining requirements, such as passing English and civics exams.
Under the new approach, however, USCIS requires its officers to move away from purely mechanical reviews, promoting an analysis that also values the applicant’s positive aspects.
The directive states that officers must give “greater weight” to factors such as community involvement, family care, family ties in the U.S., educational attainment, stable and legal employment, length of residence in the country, and compliance with tax filing and payment.
On the other hand, the agency orders a more intense scrutiny of factors that may cast doubt on good moral character, beyond what the law stipulates. This includes actions that, while not technically or legally criminal, may be considered contrary to civic responsibility in the community, such as “recurring or reckless traffic violations, harassment, or aggressive solicitations,” as the policy notes.
The policy also provides for evaluating signs of rehabilitation for individuals with a negative history. Factors that may be considered include completion of probation periods, payment of back taxes or child support, and submission of community support letters.
Each year, the federal government has naturalized between 600,000 and 1 million immigrants, according to USCIS figures.
USCIS lead spokesperson Matthew Tragesser justified the policy as an advancement in efforts to preserve the prestige of U.S. citizenship. “U.S. citizenship is the gold standard of citizenship; it should only be offered to the best in the world,” Tragesser stated.
“Today, USCIS is incorporating a new element into the naturalization process to ensure that new U.S. citizens not only embrace the country’s culture, history, and language but also demonstrate Good Moral Character.”
The decision has drawn criticism from experts and former USCIS officials. Doug Rand, a former senior USCIS official during the Biden administration, argued that the policy aims to discourage legal immigrants from applying for citizenship and to facilitate denials of applications.
“They are attempting to expand the grounds for denial by redefining good moral character to include behaviors that are not serious, such as traffic violations,” Rand noted.
The measure is part of a series of immigration restrictions promoted by the U.S. government that, in addition to a visible policy of controlling undocumented immigration, have also made legal immigration more difficult.
Among these measures are the reduction of refugee admissions, the elimination of programs created in the previous administration that allowed for the regular entry of migrants, limitations on visas for certain countries, and stricter evaluations, including extended reviews of applicants’ social media activity.
