Comprehensive Strategic Analysis of S. 3283: The Exclusive Citizenship Act of 2025

Jan 26, 2026

Executive Summary

The introduction of Senate Bill 3283, titled the "Exclusive Citizenship Act of 2025," by Senator Bernie Moreno (R-OH) on December 1, 2025, marks a pivotal moment in the contemporary discourse regarding American identity, sovereignty, and the legal parameters of nationality.1 At its core, the legislation proposes a statutory prohibition on dual citizenship, mandating that all United States citizens owe "sole and exclusive allegiance" to the United States.3 If enacted, the bill would fundamentally alter the demographic, economic, and diplomatic landscape of the nation, requiring millions of Americans to make a binary choice between their U.S. citizenship and any foreign nationality they possess, whether acquired by birth, descent, naturalization, or marriage.4

This report provides an exhaustive, multi-dimensional analysis of S. 3283. It moves beyond a superficial reading of the bill’s text to explore the profound constitutional collisions, economic ripple effects, and geopolitical consequences inherent in its design. The analysis suggests that while the bill faces a statistically negligible probability of enactment due to insurmountable constitutional barriers—specifically the Fourteenth Amendment and the Supreme Court’s rulings in Afroyim v. Rusk and Vance v. Terrazas—its introduction serves as a potent signal of a shifting ideological framework within certain factions of the American political right.5

The report is structured to provide a granular examination of every facet of the proposed legislation. It begins with a deep dive into the statutory mechanics of the bill, followed by a rigorous constitutional critique. Subsequent sections analyze the impact on specific populations, including the estimated 40 million Americans eligible for dual nationality, strategic diaspora communities such as Israeli-Americans and Irish-Americans, and the U.S. military’s reliance on immigrant recruits.7 The financial implications, particularly regarding the "Exit Tax" and administrative enforcement costs, are modeled in detail.9 Finally, the report situates the U.S. debate within the broader context of global nationality law, contrasting the "exclusive allegiance" model with the "flexible citizenship" trend observed in peer democracies.

---

1. Legislative Anatomy and Statutory Mechanisms

To understand the full scope of S. 3283, it is necessary to dissect its provisions line by line. The bill is not merely a statement of principle; it creates specific, time-bound legal obligations that would trigger the automatic loss of citizenship for non-compliance.

1.1 The Doctrine of Undivided Allegiance

The preamble and findings of S. 3283 articulate a philosophy of zero-sum nationalism. The text explicitly asserts that "It is in the national interest of the United States to ensure that United States citizenship is held exclusively".2 Senator Moreno, himself a naturalized citizen born in Colombia, framed this in his introductory remarks: "If you want to be an American, it's all or nothing. It's time to end dual citizenship for good".1

This language seeks to codify a concept of "undivided allegiance" that dominated U.S. nationality law in the early 20th century but was largely dismantled by the judiciary and legislative reforms in the post-World War II era.10 The bill predicates its restrictions on the assumption that foreign citizenship creates "conflicts of interest" and "divided loyalties" incompatible with American civic duty.1

1.2 The "Constructive Relinquishment" Mechanism

The most legally aggressive component of S. 3283 is its mechanism for enforcement. The bill amends the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) to create a specific pathway for the involuntary loss of citizenship based on administrative inaction.

1.2.1 The One-Year Ultimatum

Upon enactment, the bill initiates a one-year grace period. During this window, any United States citizen who possesses a foreign citizenship must affirmatively act to resolve their status. They have two options:

1. Renounce Foreign Citizenship: Submit a formal, written renunciation of the foreign nationality to the U.S. Secretary of State.
2. Renounce U.S. Citizenship: Submit a formal, written renunciation of U.S. nationality to the Secretary of Homeland Security.2

1.2.2 Silence as Consent

Crucially, the bill dictates the consequence of inaction. Section 4(c)(2) states that an individual who fails to comply with the renunciation requirement within the one-year timeframe "shall be deemed to have voluntarily relinquished United States citizenship".3

This provision is a legislative attempt to redefine the concept of "voluntariness." Under current Supreme Court precedent, the intent to relinquish citizenship must be proven by the government. S. 3283 flips this burden, creating a statutory presumption that silence (failure to act) equates to a voluntary desire to expatriate. This "constructive relinquishment" is the legal pivot point upon which the entire bill rests—and likely the point upon which it would fracture under judicial review.

1.3 Scope of "Foreign Citizenship"

The bill defines foreign citizenship broadly. It does not distinguish between:

• Active Naturalization: An American who moves to France and voluntarily applies for French citizenship.
• Passive Acquisition (Jus Sanguinis): An American born in Ohio to Italian parents, who acquires Italian citizenship automatically at birth without ever visiting Italy.
• Marriage: An American who marries an Iranian national and acquires Iranian citizenship automatically under Iranian law.11

By encompassing "any status conferring nationality or allegiance," the bill targets millions of "accidental" dual citizens who may not even be aware of their status, placing them in legal jeopardy regarding their U.S. citizenship.12

1.4 The Administrative Mandate

Section 5 of the bill mandates the creation of a massive new bureaucratic infrastructure. The Secretary of State is ordered to "promulgate regulations... including procedures for declaration, verification, and recordkeeping of exclusive citizenship".3 This effectively requires the establishment of a federal registry of dual nationals, a database that does not currently exist and would require the collection of sensitive personal data from 330 million Americans to verify compliance.13

---

2. Constitutional Crisis: The Legal Viability of S. 3283

The most significant barrier to the implementation of the Exclusive Citizenship Act is the United States Constitution. A comprehensive review of legal scholarship and Supreme Court jurisprudence indicates that the bill is likely "unconstitutional on its face".14 The conflict arises primarily from the Fourteenth Amendment's Citizenship Clause and the due process protections evolved by the Court over the last six decades.

2.1 The Fourteenth Amendment Firewall

The Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment reads: "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside."

Historically, this clause was interpreted to mean that the government could not deny citizenship to former slaves. However, in the 20th century, the Supreme Court expanded this protection to mean that Congress lacks the power to strip citizenship from any person who fits this definition, unless that person voluntarily relinquishes it.15

2.2 The Jurisprudence of Sovereignty: Afroyim v. Rusk (1967)

The seminal case governing this issue is Afroyim v. Rusk. Beys Afroyim, a naturalized U.S. citizen, moved to Israel and voted in a Knesset election. The State Department attempted to strip his citizenship under the Nationality Act of 1940, which listed voting in a foreign election as an expatriating act.

In a 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court overruled the 1940 Act. Justice Hugo Black, writing for the majority, established a fundamental principle: "The Fourteenth Amendment protects every citizen of this Nation against a congressional forcible destruction of his citizenship." The Court held that citizenship is not a license that expires upon misbehavior; it is a constitutional right that resides with the individual, not the state. Therefore, Congress has no power to enact a law that strips citizenship without the citizen's specific, voluntary assent.6

Implication for S. 3283: S. 3283 attempts to do exactly what Afroyim forbids—strip citizenship based on a legislative condition (holding foreign nationality) rather than the individual's choice.

2.3 The Standard of Intent: Vance v. Terrazas (1980)

While Afroyim limited Congress's power, Vance v. Terrazas clarified the standard of proof. The Court ruled that while Congress can designate certain acts (like swearing allegiance to a foreign power) as potentially expatriating, the government must prove by a "preponderance of the evidence" that the individual intended to relinquish U.S. citizenship when committing that act.

Critically, the Court held that intent cannot be simply presumed from the act itself. Just because someone takes a foreign oath does not automatically mean they intend to lose U.S. citizenship; they might intend to hold both.17

Implication for S. 3283: The bill's mechanism of "deeming" silence as voluntary relinquishment violates the Terrazas standard. A legislative fiat that "inaction equals intent" is a legal fiction that courts have repeatedly rejected. Silence is ambiguous; it does not satisfy the evidentiary burden of proving a specific intent to abandon rights.6

2.4 Due Process and Equal Protection

Beyond the specific citizenship cases, S. 3283 raises Fifth Amendment Due Process concerns.

• Lack of Notice: Given that millions of Americans are "accidental" dual citizens, many would not know they are required to renounce a foreign citizenship they may strictly hold on paper. Stripping their rights for failing to comply with a law they are unaware of would be a gross violation of procedural due process.19
• Equal Protection: The bill creates two classes of citizens: those with purely domestic lineage and those with foreign lineage. While Schneider v. Rusk (1964) dealt with naturalized citizens, the principle that Congress cannot discriminate between types of citizens is deeply embedded in constitutional law.20

2.5 The "Political Question" Counter-Argument

Proponents of the bill might argue that the regulation of foreign allegiance is a "political question" involving foreign affairs, an area where the judiciary often defers to the legislature. They might cite Perez v. Brownell (1958), which upheld stripping citizenship for voting abroad to prevent international embarrassment. However, Afroyim explicitly overruled Perez. Unless the current Supreme Court is willing to overturn Afroyim—a precedent that has stood for nearly 60 years—the "political question" defense is legally defunct.5

---

3. Demographics: The Scale of Disenfranchisement

The scope of S. 3283 is vast. While precise data is unavailable because the U.S. Census does not ask about dual citizenship, demographic analyses suggest that the affected population is in the tens of millions.

3.1 The "40 Million" Estimate

Estimates indicate that over 40 million Americans—more than 10% of the population—are either dual citizens or eligible for dual citizenship.7 This figure comprises three distinct groups:

3.1.1 Naturalized Citizens

Since 2014, roughly 7 to 8 million immigrants have naturalized as U.S. citizens.21 The majority of these individuals come from nations that allow dual citizenship (e.g., Mexico, India, Philippines, Vietnam). Under S. 3283, every single one of these new Americans would be forced to formally renounce their birth nationality, a deeply emotional and practical severance that could deter future integration.22

3.1.2 Birthright Dual Citizens (Jus Soli + Jus Sanguinis)

Millions of children born in the U.S. to foreign parents acquire dual citizenship at birth.

• Mexico: Approximately 13% of naturalizations are Mexican nationals.21 Their U.S.-born children are Mexican citizens by descent.
• India: While India restricts dual citizenship, it offers OCI (Overseas Citizen of India) status, which functions similarly. S. 3283’s broad definition of "allegiance" could target OCI holders.23

3.1.3 Ancestral Citizenship Claimants

A growing trend among Americans is "reclaiming" citizenship through ancestry (jus sanguinis).

• Ireland: Any person with an Irish-born grandparent is eligible for Irish citizenship. Millions of Americans qualify.7
• Italy: Citizenship can be passed down without limit, provided the line was not broken by naturalization before 1992.
• Israel: The Law of Return grants citizenship eligibility to any Jew, and children of Israeli citizens are automatically citizens.

S. 3283 effectively creates a retroactive barrier to these heritage claims, forcing millions to choose between their American present and their ancestral past.

3.2 Strategic Diaspora Case Studies

3.2.1 Israeli-Americans

The impact on the Israeli-American community would be particularly acute. Estimates place the number of U.S. citizens holding Israeli nationality at 200,000 to 600,000.8 Many of these individuals live in the U.S. but maintain deep ties to Israel, including serving in the IDF reserves.

• The Dilemma: S. 3283 would force these individuals to renounce Israeli citizenship, potentially affecting their ability to travel to Israel, own property, or support family members during conflicts.24
• Political Irony: Given the strong support for Israel within the Republican party, a bill that disenfranchises hundreds of thousands of Zionists creates a severe internal political contradiction.7

3.2.2 The Irish and EU Connection

Americans with Irish citizenship often use it to work and travel freely within the European Union. Losing this status would strip them of EU residency rights, closing off economic opportunities and educational exchanges.25 This would be viewed as a direct attack on the upward mobility of the Irish-American working class.26

3.3 High-Profile Political Implications

The bill creates awkward scenarios for the political elite.

• Melania and Barron Trump: The former First Lady, a naturalized citizen from Slovenia, and her son Barron, a dual citizen by descent, would be subject to the law’s renunciation requirements.16
• Elon Musk: A citizen of South Africa, Canada, and the U.S., Musk is a central figure in the modern conservative movement. S. 3283 would force him to renounce two of his three nationalities.7

---

4. Economic Fallout: The Price of Exclusivity

The economic theory behind S. 3283 appears to be that exclusive citizenship strengthens the nation. However, a financial analysis suggests the opposite: the bill would likely trigger capital flight, reduce tax revenue, and impose massive administrative costs.

4.1 The "Exit Tax" Trap

The United States is unique in its "Citizenship-Based Taxation" (CBT) regime. Americans are taxed on global income. For those who choose to keep their foreign citizenship (and thus lose U.S. citizenship), the financial penalty is severe.

Mechanism: Relinquishing U.S. citizenship triggers the "Exit Tax" under IRS sections 877 and 877A if the individual is a "covered expatriate."

• Thresholds: A covered expatriate is anyone with a net worth over $2 million, or an average annual income tax liability of roughly $200,000 over the past 5 years.9
• The Tax: Covered expatriates are taxed as if they sold all their worldwide assets on the day before expatriation ("mark-to-market"). This means paying capital gains tax (up to 23.8%) on unrealized gains in homes, stocks, and retirement accounts.9

Scenario: Consider a dual US-UK citizen living in London with a house bought for £500,000 now worth £2.5 million. If S. 3283 forces them to choose British citizenship, they immediately owe the IRS hundreds of thousands of dollars in taxes on "gains" they haven't actually realized. This amounts to a massive wealth confiscation event.

4.2 Revenue Loss from Expats

Conversely, if millions of dual citizens abroad are forced to renounce U.S. citizenship, the IRS loses a permanent stream of future tax revenue. While many expats use foreign tax credits to reduce liability, high earners still pay significant sums to the U.S. Treasury. S. 3283 essentially fires these taxpayers.29

4.3 Administrative Costs: The Registry

Creating the "exclusive citizenship" registry mandated by the bill is a fiscal black hole.

• Data Collection: The State Department would need to build a secure system to process 40 million declarations.
• Verification: Verifying foreign citizenship status is diplomatically fraught. The U.S. cannot compel France or Germany to release their citizenship rolls due to GDPR and national sovereignty statutes.13
• Enforcement: The Department of Homeland Security would need new protocols to screen incoming travelers for "hidden" dual nationality, likely slowing border processing and increasing personnel costs.2

4.4 Impact on U.S. Real Estate and Investment

Foreign investors often seek U.S. citizenship (via EB-5 visas) as a safe harbor. If obtaining that safety requires forfeiting their primary citizenship and business ties abroad, the U.S. becomes a significantly less attractive destination for global capital.10 This could cool demand in high-end real estate markets (Miami, NYC) heavily reliant on dual-national buyers.

---

5. National Security and Military Readiness

Proponents argue S. 3283 enhances security by ensuring loyalty. However, national security experts and military data suggest the bill would degrade readiness and blind U.S. intelligence.

5.1 The Recruitment Crisis

The U.S. military is currently struggling to meet recruitment goals. Immigrants are a vital gap-filler.

• The Numbers: Approximately 45,000 immigrants are actively serving. Over 760,000 have naturalized through service in the last century.32
• The Chilling Effect: Legal Permanent Residents (Green Card holders) often enlist to fast-track citizenship. If that citizenship requires them to legally sever ties with their parents' home country, enlistment becomes a much higher-stakes decision. Many may choose not to serve, exacerbating the personnel shortfall.32

5.2 Intelligence and Cultural Competency

In an era of great power competition, the U.S. needs linguists and cultural experts. Dual citizens are often the only individuals with the native-level fluency in Arabic, Mandarin, Farsi, or Russian needed for intelligence operations.

• Security Clearances: Currently, dual citizenship is a risk factor but not a disqualifier (SEAD 4, Guideline C). Investigators look for "foreign preference".33
• Loss of Human Assets: By banning dual citizenship, the U.S. effectively purges its intelligence community of its most culturally competent agents. An operative who can travel on a foreign passport is a strategic asset; S. 3283 turns them into a liability.34

5.3 Soft Power and Citizen Diplomacy

Dual citizens act as bridges. An American who is also a citizen of Ghana or Poland facilitates trade, educational exchange, and diplomatic goodwill. They export American values to their other country. Forcing them to renounce one side of their identity severs these organic diplomatic channels, reducing U.S. "soft power" globally.35

---

6. Global Comparative Analysis: U.S. vs. The World

S. 3283 would move the United States against the prevailing current of global nationality law. The trend among Western democracies for the past 50 years has been toward "flexible citizenship".37

6.1 The Restrictive Bloc

By passing this bill, the U.S. would join a club of nations with restrictive citizenship policies, generally characterized by authoritarianism or defensive nationalism:

• China: Strictly forbids dual citizenship. Naturalization abroad triggers automatic loss.38
• India: Constitutionally bans dual citizenship, though the OCI card mitigates this.23
• Japan: Requires a choice of allegiance by age 22, reflecting a cultural emphasis on homogeneity.38
• Saudi Arabia: Strict ban.39

6.2 The Permissive Bloc (U.S. Peers)

Conversely, the U.S.'s closest allies and economic peers embrace dual nationality:

• United Kingdom: No restrictions.
• Canada: Fully permissive.
• Australia & New Zealand: Fully permissive.38
• Germany: Recently liberalized its laws in 2024 to allow dual citizenship for non-EU citizens, recognizing it as essential for attracting global talent.6

Strategic Implication: If the U.S. adopts a restrictive model while Europe and the Commonwealth remain open, the global "war for talent" will tilt away from the U.S. Highly skilled mobile professionals will prefer jurisdictions that allow them to maintain their global safety nets.40

Table 1: Comparative Approaches to Dual Citizenship

Country	Policy Stance	Enforcement Mechanism	Strategic Impact
United States (Current)	Permissive (Passive)	None (Self-reporting)	High Soft Power / High Integration
United States (S. 3283)	Prohibitive	Constructive Relinquishment	Isolation / Talent Repulsion
China	Prohibitive	Automatic Loss	Control over Diaspora
Germany	Permissive (2024+)	Administrative Registration	Attraction of Skilled Labor
Japan	Restrictive	Declaration by Age 22	Cultural Homogeneity
United Kingdom	Permissive	None	Post-Imperial Commonwealth Ties

---

7. Unintended Consequences: The Human and Legal Toll

The binary logic of S. 3283 ("all or nothing") crashes into the complex reality of international law, creating chaos in areas the bill’s authors likely did not anticipate.

7.1 Property Rights in Restricted Zones

Many countries restrict land ownership to citizens, particularly in strategic areas.

• Mexico: Under Article 27 of the Constitution, foreigners cannot directly own land within 100km of borders or 50km of coasts (the "Restricted Zone"). They must use a bank trust (Fideicomiso).41
• Impact: A dual Mexican-American living in San Diego who owns a family home in Tijuana (within the zone) would be forced to renounce Mexican citizenship. This could legally invalidate their direct ownership of the property, forcing a sale or a costly transfer to a trust.

7.2 Statelessness and The "Limbo" Problem

The bill assumes renunciation is a simple administrative act. In reality, some countries make it impossible to renounce citizenship.

• Argentina: Citizenship is an "inalienable attribute of the person" and generally cannot be renounced.13
• Iran: Renunciation requires the consent of the Council of Ministers, which is rarely granted.
• Scenario: An Iranian-American attempts to renounce Iranian citizenship to comply with S. 3283. Iran refuses. The U.S. deems them non-compliant and strips their U.S. citizenship. The individual is now effectively stateless in the U.S., stripped of rights but unable to be deported to Iran. This creates a class of "legal ghosts".13

7.3 Inheritance Disenfranchisement

In countries with "forced heirship" laws (common in civil law jurisdictions like France or Spain), inheritance rights often track with citizenship or domicile. Renouncing citizenship could alter an individual's legal standing in probate courts abroad, potentially disinheriting Americans from family wealth overseas.43

7.4 Native American Sovereignty

While Native American tribes are "domestic dependent nations" and not foreign states, the rhetoric of "exclusive allegiance" raises concerns in Indian Country. If the principle of singular allegiance is codified, could it be weaponized against Tribal sovereignty in the future? While the bill defines "foreign citizenship" as pertaining to foreign countries, the ideological thrust threatens the complex, layered sovereignty that defines Native American status.28

---

8. Political Viability and Prognosis

Despite the sweeping nature of the bill, its legislative path is extremely narrow, bordering on non-existent.

8.1 The "Committee Graveyard"

S. 3283 has been referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee. The composition of this committee makes it a likely killing ground for the bill.

• Democratic Opposition: Members like Dick Durbin (D-IL) will vehemently oppose the bill on constitutional and humanitarian grounds.44
• Republican Hesitancy: While the GOP platform is restrictionist, business-oriented Republicans (and those with large immigrant constituencies) will likely view the bill as too radical and economically damaging.
• Lack of Co-sponsors: As of the latest tracking, the bill has zero co-sponsors.6 In the Senate, a bill without a second signature is generally considered a "message bill"—intended for press releases, not passage.

8.2 The Filibuster

Even if the bill miraculously cleared committee, it would require 60 votes to overcome a filibuster on the Senate floor. Given the certain Democratic opposition and likely defections from moderate Republicans, reaching 60 votes is mathematically impossible in the 119th Congress.45

8.3 Motivation: Why Introduce It?

If the bill cannot pass, why introduce it?

1. Overton Window Shift: It moves the conversation. By proposing a total ban, lesser restrictions (e.g., denying security clearances to dual citizens) seem more moderate and passable.
2. Base Mobilization: It signals to the nativist base that the Senator is fighting for "pure" American identity, distinguishing him from "globalist" peers.19
3. Campaign Material: It provides a clear "America First" soundbite for future primary campaigns.

---

9. Conclusion

The Exclusive Citizenship Act of 2025 is a legislative artifact of a resurgent nationalism that views global connectivity as a vulnerability rather than a strength. While its statutory aim is to purify American allegiance, its practical effect would be to alienate millions of loyal citizens, trigger a constitutional crisis, and impose a heavy economic toll on the nation.

The bill is fundamentally at odds with the modern world, where identity is fluid, and capital, talent, and families span borders. More importantly, it is at odds with the U.S. Constitution, which, through the Fourteenth Amendment and the Afroyim ruling, places the right of citizenship beyond the reach of the legislative pen.

For the 40 million Americans with dual nationality, S. 3283 is unlikely to become law. However, its existence serves as a stark reminder that the definition of "American" remains a contested battlefield. The proposal represents the most aggressive legislative attempt in a century to narrow that definition, signaling that for a segment of the American political class, the "melting pot" should no longer include those who maintain a connection to the pot from which they came.

Works cited

1. New Moreno Bill to Outlaw Dual Citizenship, accessed January 25, 2026, https://www.moreno.senate.gov/press-releases/new-moreno-bill-to-outlaw-dual-citizenship/
2. Text - S.3283 - 119th Congress (2025-2026): Exclusive Citizenship Act of 2025, accessed January 25, 2026, https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/senate-bill/3283/text
3. Exclusive Citizenship Act of 2025 | MORENO, accessed January 25, 2026, https://www.moreno.senate.gov/wp-content/uploads/2025/12/Exclusive-Citizenship-Act-of-2025.pdf
4. American Citizens and Nothing Else: What the Exclusive Citizenship Act of 2025 would do — and what it means for dual U.S. citizens | Immigration Lawyers - Pennsylvania, accessed January 25, 2026, https://nationalimmigrationlawyers.com/american-citizens-and-nothing-else-what-the-exclusive-citizenship-act-of-2025-would-do-and-what-it-means-for-dual-u-s-citizens/
5. Thoughts On Ohio Senator Moreneo's "Exclusive Citizenship Act Of 2025" - U.S. Citizens and Green Card Holders Residing in Canada and Abroad, accessed January 25, 2026, https://citizenshipsolutions.ca/2025/12/02/thoughts-on-ohio-senator-moreneos-exclusive-citizenship-act-of-2025/
6. US Dual Citizenship Ban Proposal: What German-Americans Need to Know - SE Legal, accessed January 25, 2026, https://se-legal.de/moreno-dual-citizenship-bill-german-americans/?lang=en
7. Doubts abound about proposed dual citizenship ban, accessed January 25, 2026, https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/premium/4417612/doubts-proposed-dual-citizenship-ban-widespread-tax-legal-implications/
8. US senator pushes ban on dual citizenship for Americans | The Jerusalem Post, accessed January 25, 2026, https://www.jpost.com/american-politics/article-879110
9. Dual Citizenship Bill 2025: Key Facts for Americans Abroad - Greenback Expat Tax Services, accessed January 25, 2026, https://www.greenbacktaxservices.com/blog/dual-citizenship-bill/
10. Dual Citizenship | USA Wealth Report 2025 | Henley & Partners, accessed January 25, 2026, https://www.henleyglobal.com/publications/usa-wealth-report-2025/dual-citizenship-new-american-dream
11. Senator Bernie Moreno Introduces Bill To Eliminate Dual Citizenship, accessed January 25, 2026, https://us-tax.org/2025/12/08/senator-bernie-moreno-introduces-bill-to-eliminate-dual-citizenship/
12. EO - Similar Bills | BillTrack50, accessed January 25, 2026, https://www.billtrack50.com/executive-order/similar/77849
13. Is Dual Citizenship at Risk? A New Bill Seeks to End Dual Citizenship - Fuessel Law, accessed January 25, 2026, https://fuessel-law.com/is-dual-citizenship-at-risk-a-new-bill-seeks-to-end-dual-citizenship/
14. Statement on Senator Moreno's Unconstitutional Citizenship ..., accessed January 25, 2026, https://www.democratsabroad.org/da_statement_on_moreno_bill
15. Senator Bernie Moreno Proposes to End Dual Citizenship in the US - Immigrant Invest, accessed January 25, 2026, https://immigrantinvest.com/insider/us-to-end-dual-citizenship/
16. Why I Think Senate Bill S.3283 "Exclusive Citizenship Act of 2025" Is Destined for Failure, accessed January 25, 2026, https://americajosh.com/blog/important/why-i-think-senate-bill-s-3283-exclusive-citizenship-act-of-2025-is-destined-for-failure/
17. Is the U.S. Moving Toward a Dual Citizenship Ban? - Song Law Firm, accessed January 25, 2026, https://songlawfirm.com/is-the-u-s-moving-toward-a-dual-citizenship-ban/
18. Dual Citizenship Under Fire: Separating Fact from Fiction in the Debate Over American Loyalty - Tancinco Law, P.C. - Trusted. Established. Dependable., accessed January 25, 2026, https://www.tancinco.com/dual-citizenship-under-fire/
19. Bernie Moreno Citizenship Act: Is Dual Citizenship Banned? - Herman Legal Group, accessed January 25, 2026, https://www.lawfirm4immigrants.com/bernie-moreno-exclusive-citizenship-act-unconstitutional-dual-citizenship-ban/
20. U.S. Congress Pushes to Expand Denaturalization: Can You Lose Your Citizenship?, accessed January 25, 2026, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0PXA-_RbYpg
21. Naturalization Statistics - USCIS, accessed January 25, 2026, https://www.uscis.gov/citizenship-resource-center/naturalization-statistics
22. Only one-third of Americans support eliminating dual citizenship - YouGov, accessed January 25, 2026, https://today.yougov.com/politics/articles/53679-only-one-third-of-americans-support-eliminating-dual-citizenship
23. Dual citizenship guide 2026: Countries, tax rules, and how to apply, accessed January 25, 2026, https://www.taxesforexpats.com/articles/expatriation/countries-that-accept-dual-citizenship.html
24. How a Republican Bill Threatens the Future of Millions of Dual-Citizen Americans, accessed January 25, 2026, https://www.alestiklal.net/en/article/how-a-republican-bill-threatens-the-future-of-millions-of-dual-citizen-americans
25. 'I feel alienated': American dual nationals in Europe ready to renounce citizenship, accessed January 25, 2026, https://www.thelocal.com/20251213/i-feel-alienated-american-dual-nationals-in-europe-ready-to-renounce-citizenship
26. Megathread- Proposed Legislation to End Dual Citizenship for USC : r/AmerExit - Reddit, accessed January 25, 2026, https://www.reddit.com/r/AmerExit/comments/1pcggxv/megathread_proposed_legislation_to_end_dual/
27. Melania & Barron Trump To Lose Dual Citizenship? MAGA Senator Proposes Exclusive Citizenship Act - YouTube, accessed January 25, 2026, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BAqpOVuiK_g
28. Moreno's Fast-Track Citizenship Bill: Tax & Social Security Bombs, Diplomatic Chaos & More – Virginia, accessed January 25, 2026, https://us-tax.org/2026/01/06/morenos-fast-track-citizenship-bill-tax-social-security-bombs-diplomatic-chaos-more/
29. Dual citizenship taxes: Complete guide for US expats (2026), accessed January 25, 2026, https://www.taxesforexpats.com/articles/expatriation/taxes-for-dual-citizens.html
30. Dual Citizenship Taxes for U.S. Expats | H&R Block®, accessed January 25, 2026, https://www.hrblock.com/expat-tax-preparation/resource-center/filing/status/us-dual-citizenship-taxes/
31. Attorney warns potential dual citizenship law could impact millions of Americans - 9News, accessed January 25, 2026, https://www.9news.com/article/news/local/attorney-warns-potential-dual-citizenship-laws-could-impact-millions/73-dcecbfea-a382-475d-8fac-477bd1840d22
32. Immigrants in the Military: 5 Things To Know - FWD.us, accessed January 25, 2026, https://www.fwd.us/news/immigrants-in-the-military/
33. Addressing Common Questions and Concerns from Dual or Naturalized Citizens Regarding the Security Clearance Process | RAND, accessed January 25, 2026, https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RRA3461-2.html
34. dual citizenship – security clearance implications - Careers, accessed January 25, 2026, https://careers.state.gov/uploads/8f/f7/8ff7b0bab879946e78f30e62c859c0f1/DualCitizenship.pdf
35. The strategic importance of U.S. values-based 'soft' power, accessed January 25, 2026, https://www.bushcenter.org/publications/the-strategic-importance-of-u-s-values-based-soft-power
36. How U.S. Immigration Policy Creates A Robust Soft Power Advantage for America, accessed January 25, 2026, https://www.niskanencenter.org/how-u-s-immigration-policy-creates-a-robust-soft-power-advantage-for-america/
37. Full article: Security, Flexible Sovereignty, and the Perils of Multiple Citizenship, accessed January 25, 2026, https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13621020600772107
38. Multiple citizenship - Wikipedia, accessed January 25, 2026, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiple_citizenship
39. Countries That Don't Allow Dual Citizenship — And Why It Matters - Henley & Partners, accessed January 25, 2026, https://www.henleyglobal.com/newsroom/industry-insights/countries-dont-allow-dual-citizenship-and-why-it-matters
40. US Exit Options| Global Mobility Report 2026 - Henley & Partners, accessed January 25, 2026, https://www.henleyglobal.com/publications/global-mobility-report/2026-january/americans-continue-explore-exit-options
41. ACQUISITION OF PROPERTIES IN MEXICO - Consulado de México, accessed January 25, 2026, https://consulmex.sre.gob.mx/reinounido/index.php/en/servicios/218-acquisition-of-properties-in-mexico
42. How to Buy Investment Property in Mexico as a Foreigner, accessed January 25, 2026, https://www.globalpropertyguide.com/latin-america/mexico/buying-guide
43. Dual Citizenship for US Citizens: Benefits and Disadvantages - Immigration Advice Service, accessed January 25, 2026, https://us.iasservices.org.uk/advantages-and-disadvantages-of-dual-citizenship/
44. Members | United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary, accessed January 25, 2026, https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/about/members
45. US SB3283 | 2025-2026 | 119th Congress - LegiScan, accessed January 25, 2026, https://legiscan.com/US/bill/SB3283/2025