New USCIS rule gives officers sweeping power to judge applicants’ morality, from traffic tickets to tax returns
When it comes to immigrants who want to become citizens of the United States, the second-term government of Donald Trump has turned on the moral compass. Although “good moral character” has long been an essential part of the naturalization process, the DOHS is now looking into more detailed areas of an applicant’s life as opposed to just checking boxes, as has been routine for so long.
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) issued a new directive on Friday directing officers to give much more weight to whether an applicant’s character truly embodies American values, which go beyond just avoiding jail time.
As a result, immigrants who wish to become citizens after getting a green card will have to submit to a more extensive and private assessment of their contributions, behavior, and even violations of traffic laws!
For many years, the term “good moral character” has been a part of U.S. immigration law. Naturalization applicants already had to prove they were not “habitual drunkards,” d–g traffickers, or convicted murderers.
Even so, the Trump administration wants officers to start digging deeper.
The memo encourages officers to perform a “holistic assessment” of an applicant’s life rather than just relying on a mechanical checklist that looks for serious crimes. Community involvement, caregiving responsibilities, lawful employment, time spent in the United States, tax history, and academic achievements must now be taken into account throughout the review process.
To put it simply, you might rack up moral points by raising your children, filing your taxes, and helping out at the local food bank. Yet, because of the increased scrutiny, even legally allowed behaviors that were previously thought of as trivial, such as constantly reckless driving, harassment, or “aggressive solicitation,” can now be used against you.
Officers have more discretion as a result of this change. However, they also have more freedom to reject applicants for reasons that are not going to be clear to them at the time of application or even after it gets rejected.
According to the USCIS memo, “acts that are contrary to the average behavior of citizens in the jurisdiction where aliens reside” may be taken into account. It also means that a person’s bid for citizenship may be seriously limited by a poor driving record in California or unpaid child support in Texas — all pointing to their so-called “moral character.”
The goal is to raise the standard for what it means to be an American. The policy seeks to “restore integrity” to the naturalization process, according to agency chief spokesman Matthew Tragesser, who spoke to ABC News. According to him, “U.S. citizenship is the gold standard of citizenship — it should only be offered to the world’s best of the best.”
Donald Trump’s larger political message (that citizenship is a privilege rather than a right and ought to be saved for people who actively uphold American values instead of just adhering to the law) is made possible by this framing.
The new policy, which puts stricter standards and gives immigration officers greater flexibility, is also in line with the administration’s ongoing attempts to restrict possible paths to citizenship.
Critics perceive a more cynical element at work, though. Joe Biden-era USCIS official Doug Rand contends the new rule was created to scare new applicants away. Rand claims that the administration is, in essence, discouraging legal immigrants from applying for citizenship by broadening the definition of “bad moral character” to include minor, non-criminal behavior.
Rand told ABC News, “They’re trying to increase the grounds for denial of U.S. citizenship by (…) torturing the definition of good moral character to encompass extremely harmless behavior.”
Between 600,000 and 1 million immigrants become citizens of the United States each year, the Irish Star reports.
Years of legal residency, civics and English proficiency exams, and strict background checks are already part of the complex process. Now, staying true to constantly changing standards is more vital than avoiding crimes when defining “good moral character.”
