Background
On December 1, 2025 Ohio Senator Bernie Moreno, tabled his “
A pdf of the proposed legislation is available here:
Exclusive-Citizenship-Act-of-2025
The progress of the legislation (if any) may be followed here.
It was immediately understood that the Moreno bill would affect both Melania and Baron Trump, each of whom has dual U.S./Slovenian citizenship.
My comments on the proposed legislation fall into ten categories:
1. What the Bill is intended to achieve
2. What the Bill assumes about the meaning of citizenship
3. Constitutionality – Conflicts with the 14th Amendment
4. Inside Looking Out (American dual citizens living inside the United States)
5. Outside looking in (Americans Dual Citizens Abroad)
6. Effect on Green Card Holders – Will they naturalize as U.S. citizens?
7. Creating a data base of citizenship and multiple citizenships
8. Creating a situation where the laws of another country could impact who can enter politics and serve in public office in the United States
9. Effect on Internal Revenue Code 877A – Will an Exit Tax be payable if a U.S. citizen is deemed to have relinquished U.S. citizenship?
10. The Secretary Of State and the authority to make regulations
Possible conclusion:
Should the Moreno bill be enacted it would fundamentally change the nature of U.S. citizenship which already carries significant restrictions and obligations. It would certainly associate U.S. citizenship with a general loss of freedom.
It is blatantly obvious that in the 21st century that U.S. citizenship is NOT compatible with the freedom of the individual.
1. What the Bill is intended to achieve
3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Exclusive Citizenship
5 Act of 2025’’.
6 SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
7 Congress makes the following findings:
8 (1) To preserve the integrity of national citizen
9 ship, allegiance to the United States must be undi
10 vided.
1 (2) Existing law allows certain United States
2 citizens to maintain foreign citizenship, which may
3 create conflicts of interest and divided loyalties.
4 (3) It is in the national interest of the United
5 States to ensure that United States citizenship is
6 held exclusively.
Clearly the bill is intended to define the meaning of U.S. citizenship as a citizenship that does NOT allow for more than one citizenship.
Notice also that the Bill applies to BOTH U.S. citizens and U.S. nationals!
2. What the Bill assumes about the meaning of citizenship
The bill assumes that:
– citizenship includes “allegiance” to the country of citizenship and that U.S citizens cannot have allegiance to more than one country
– A purpose of citizenship is to benefit the national interest. The United States assumes that U.S. citizens can be used as instruments of foreign policy. For example:
Generally, this reflects an assumption that U.S. citizenship is a property interest that the U.S. government has in the citizen!
3. Constitutionality – Conflicts with the 14th Amendment
The Moreno bill conflicts with the decisions of the U.S. Supreme Court in Afroyim v. Rusk and Vance v. Terrazas.
In summary: These cases (although they are five to four decisions) hold that individuals born or naturalized in the United States are U.S. citizens and Congress CANNOT strip them of their U.S. citizenship. Citizenship belongs to the individual and can be relinquished only with the consent of the individual. To be clear: Congress cannot strip those born or naturalized in the United States of their U.S. citizenship.
This law – as per Rogers v. Bellei – could be applied to Americans who were born outside the United States and acquired U.S. citizenship through a parent.
4. Inside Looking Out (American dual citizens living inside the United States)
My immediate thoughts are reflected in the following tweet:
5. Outside looking in (Americans Dual Citizens Abroad)
This is one more clear attack on U.S. citizens living outside the United States in their country of second citizenship. U.S. citizens living outside the United States as citizens of their country of residence will have to choose between:
A. Filing with the U.S government a certification of renunciation of their non-U.S citizenship; or
B. Renouncing their non-U.S citizenship in the country where they reside (likely meaning they can no longer reside in that country).
6. Effect on Green Card Holders – Will they naturalize as U.S. citizens?
It seems obvious that fewer Green Card holders would naturalize as U.S. citizens.
7. Creating a data base of citizenship and multiple citizenships
Interestingly Russia requires the reporting of dual citizenship.
8. Creating a situation where the laws of another country could impact who can enter politics and serve in public office in the United States
Australia provides an example of how dual citizenship can restrict who can serve in the legislature …
Citizenship showdown coming: Has Australia ceded control of its sovereignty to foreign countries?
9. Additional unintended consequences including the impact on entitlement to a military pension
U.S. tax lawyer Virginia La Torre Jeker has written a number of posts and participated in podcasts (here and here) on the Moreno bill. Her most recent article in Forbes highlights another unintended consequence – specifically the possible impact on continued entitlement to military pensions. Her article of December 19, 2025 includes:
Military retired pay has long been treated differently from civilian pensions. Under Department of Defense regulations retired Regular military members are considered to remain in a form of continuing service. They are subject to recall, remain governed by aspects of military law, and are viewed as part of the armed forces even after active duty ends. Retired pay is therefore characterized not merely as deferred compensation, but as reduced pay for continued readiness and availability. While Department of Defense regulations are not statutes enacted by Congress, they do govern how military retired pay is administered in practice. This means they determine outcomes unless and until Congress or the courts intervene.
The Department of Defense has historically taken the position that continued entitlement to military retired pay is incompatible with the loss of U.S. citizenship, because citizenship is integral to membership in the U.S. armed forces. Once citizenship is lost, the legal basis for retired military status, and therefore retired pay, falls away.
Much of this doctrine is reflected in opinions issued by the Government Accountability Office. Over the years, GAO has concluded that when a retired Regular military member voluntarily relinquishes U.S. citizenship, entitlement to retired pay ceases. These opinions are sometimes cited as authority for the proposition that expatriation and military retired status cannot coexist.
While GAO decisions are not court cases and do not constitute binding precedent, they are routinely relied upon in administering pay and benefits. In practice, they often function as the governing rule unless and until they are displaced by statute or court decision.
10. Effect on Internal Revenue Code 877A – Will an Exit Tax be payable if a U.S. citizen is deemed to have relinquished U.S. citizenship?
Moreno Bill
1 SEC. 4. PROHIBITION ON DUAL OR MULTIPLE CITIZENSHIP.
2 (a) IN GENERAL.—An individual may not be a citizen
3 or national of the United States while simultaneously pos
4 sessing any foreign citizenship.
5 (b) EFFECT OF ACQUISITION OF FOREIGN CITIZEN
6 SHIP.—A citizen of the United States who, after the date
7 of the enactment of this Act, voluntarily acquires foreign
8 citizenship shall be deemed to have relinquished United
9 States citizenship
10 (c) DUAL CITIZENS.—
11 (1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 1 year after
12 the date of the enactment of this Act, a citizen of
13 the United States who also possesses foreign citizen
14 ship shall—
15 (A) submit to the Secretary of State a
16 written renunciation of such foreign citizenship;
17 or
18 (B) submit to the Secretary of Homeland
19 Security a written renunciation of United
20 States citizenship.
Internal Revenue Code 877A(g)
(2)Expatriate
The term “expatriate” means—
(A)any United States citizen who relinquishes his citizenship, and
(B)any long-term resident of the United States who ceases to be a lawful permanent resident of the United States (within the meaning of section 7701(b)(6)).
(3)Expatriation date
The term “expatriation date” means—
(A)the date an individual relinquishes United States citizenship, or
(B)in the case of a long-term resident of the United States, the date on which the individual ceases to be a lawful permanent resident of the United States (within the meaning of section 7701(b)(6)).
(4)Relinquishment of citizenship
A citizen shall be treated as relinquishing his United States citizenship on the earliest of—
(A)the date the individual renounces his United States nationality before a diplomatic or consular officer of the United States pursuant to paragraph (5) of section 349(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1481(a)(5)),
(B)the date the individual furnishes to the United States Department of State a signed statement of voluntary relinquishment of United States nationality confirming the performance of an act of expatriation specified in paragraph (1), (2), (3), or (4) of section 349(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1481(a)(1)–(4)),
(C)the date the United States Department of State issues to the individual a certificate of loss of nationality, or
(D)the date a court of the United States cancels a naturalized citizen’s certificate of naturalization.
Subparagraph (A) or (B) shall not apply to any individual unless the renunciation or voluntary relinquishment is subsequently approved by the issuance to the individual of a certificate of loss of nationality by the United States Department of State.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/877A
Conclusion: This may be interpreted to mean that 877A would apply if a U.S. citizen naturalizes as a citizen of another country!
11. The Secretary Of State and the authority to make regulations
The Bill REQUIRES the Secretary of State of make regulations to administer the Act. Once again, we have a short piece of legislation which delegates the authority to create regulations that are certain to be longer and more voluminous than the Act itself.
The devil is in the details.
The danger is in the details.
The Bill includes:
4 SEC. 5. ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT.
5 Not later than 180 days after the date of the enact6 ment of this Act—
7 (1) the Secretary of State shall—
8 (A) promulgate regulations to carry out
9 this Act, including procedures for declaration,
10 verification, and recordkeeping of exclusive citi
11 zenship; and
12 (B) coordinate with the Attorney General
13 and the Secretary of Homeland Security to en
14 sure that any individual deemed to have relin
15 quished citizenship under this Act is appro
16 priately recorded in Federal systems and treat
17 ed as an alien for purposes of the immigration
18 laws; and
19 (2) the Secretary of Homeland Security shall
20 publish in the Federal Register a notification of the
21 requirement under section 4(c).
John Richardson – Follow me on X.com @ExpatriationLaw
Canadians would be able to “resume citizenship” and am wondering how many other countries have similar laws and statutes? They cannot make people travel, renounce and their other country of citizenship and return to the US they just need a statement on the letter.
https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/services/canadian-citizenship/resume-canadian-citizenship/eligibility.html