"Good Moral Character" to be considered in Citizenship Applications

[Melensdad]

To my mind this seems like a great idea.

It adds some subjective components to the citizenship test, which may make an already hard process a little bit harder, but it also, theoretically, means that people approved for citizenship will better fit into society and hold societal values that are compatible with US society. Naturally some of the radicals (HAMAS cos-play kids and other terror lovers) are upset that their moral character will be taken into account.

Trump administration to more heavily scrutinize "good moral character" requirement for U.S. citizenship

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services instructed officers on Friday to consider additional factors when determining whether immigrants applying for U.S. citizenship have a "good moral character."

www.cbsnews.com

FULL STORY at the LINK at CBS News ^^^

Trump administration to more heavily scrutinize "good moral character" requirement for U.S. citizenship​

By ​

Updated on: August 16, 2025 / 12:28 PM EDT

​

The Trump administration is signaling it will more heavily scrutinize applications filed by legal immigrants seeking American citizenship, in its latest effort to tighten access to U.S. immigration benefits.​

​

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, the federal agency overseeing the country's legal immigration system, instructed officers on Friday to consider additional factors when determining whether immigrants applying for U.S. citizenship have a "good moral character." ​

​

Typically, legal immigrants with U.S. permanent residency, also known as a green card, can apply for naturalized American citizenship after a 3- or 5-year period, depending on their case. Demonstrating "a good moral character" has long been one of the requirements in U.S. immigration law for American citizenship, alongside passing English and civics tests.​

​

For decades, under Republican and Democratic administrations, the "good moral character" assessment has generally been satisfied if applicants don't have any of the criminal offenses or disqualifying conduct outlined in U.S. immigration law. Those disqualifying factors range from violent crimes like murder and aggravated felonies to drug offenses and being a "habitual drunkard."​

​

But a policy issued Friday by USCIS expands the "good moral character" assessment, saying that determination must involve "more than a cursory mechanical review focused on the absence of wrongdoing." Instead, the review, the agency told its officers, should be "a holistic assessment of an alien's behavior, adherence to societal norms, and positive contributions that affirmatively demonstrate good moral character."​

​

The directive orders officers to place a "greater emphasis" on applicants' "positive attributes and contributions," listing community involvement, family caregiving and ties, educational attainment, "stable and lawful" employment, the length of time spent in the U.S., and paying taxes as some of those factors.​

​

The memo also mandates "greater scrutiny" of factors that show applicants lack a "good moral character," beyond the crimes and disqualifying conduct detailed in U.S. immigration law. ​

​

Those factors, the policy said, include "acts that are contrary to the average behavior of citizens in the jurisdiction where aliens reside," including actions that are "technically lawful" but also "inconsistent with civic responsibility within the community." USCIS listed "reckless or habitual traffic infractions, or harassment or aggressive solicitation" as some of those actions.​

​

Lastly, the new USCIS policy instructs officers to weigh factors that could show that applicants who have engaged in wrongdoing have rehabilitated, such as complying with probation, paying overdue taxes or child support and receiving letters of support from their community. . . . ​

 

[Melensdad]

Honestly I would love to see liberal college professors and politicians cry tears while trying to complain about this to the average, common sense, American citizen.

And from Huffington Post:

Trump Administration Gives Federal Officers More Leeway To Reject Citizenship Applications

It's expanded the ways an individual's "good moral character" can be called into question.

www.huffpost.com

​

Administration Gives Federal Officers More Leeway To Reject Citizenship Applications​

It's expanded the ways an individual's "good moral character" can be called into question.​

Aug 20, 2025, 06:56 AM EDT

Updated an hour ago​

​

New guidance from the Trump administration gives federal officers more leeway to reject citizenship applications on the basis of individuals lacking “good moral character.” ​

​

That criteria, which has long been a part of citizenship evaluations, has typically been satisfied if a person doesn’t have a history of violence or unlawful conduct, CBS News’ Camilo Montoya-Galvez reports. Following a Friday memo from U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, however, officers have been directed to take a “holistic” look at what “good moral character” entails, allowing them to flag applications for a much wider swath of reasons. ​

​

Those include whether a person has sufficient “positive attributes and contributions” such as involvement in the community, employment history and educational attainment. And they also include whether an individual has a history of lesser offenses like repeated traffic infractions or a pattern of other “acts that are contrary to the average behavior of citizens in the jurisdiction where aliens reside.”​

​

“Going forward, USCIS officers must account for an alien’s positive attributes and not simply the absence of misconduct,” the memo reads.​

 

[FrancSevin]

I really don't need to say it but,,,,; I will.

The left will employ the courts to scuttle any of this.

 

[loboloco]

"Good moral character". An entirely subjective evaluation other than not a criminal. Who's moral's? Leftist activist"s morals? Strict protestant morals? A lot of questions, no answers.

 

[Melensdad]

"Good moral character". An entirely subjective evaluation other than not a criminal. Who's moral's? Leftist activist"s morals? Strict protestant morals? A lot of questions, no answers.

No question that it is subjective.

If the administration is smart, and I think it is at least smart enough, they can objectify the subjective. So good moral character can include things like "shows a positive attitude toward freedom and liberty" on Social Media or in public venues; shows a commitment to assimilate by learning English and adopting American values, etc etc etc

 

[Melensdad]

Apparently blue haired screaming urban liberals are terrified by the new requirements.

As reported by CNN, link at the bottom of the page.

While there certainly is room for abuse of subjective criteria, the unhinged liberal wing of the democratic seems to have raised their concerns to shrill levels of panic and fear. Heaven forbid that someone who actually loves America, wants to work hard, and doesn't believe in being a burden on society should come here and apply for citizenship.

​

CNN 8/21/2025​

US to screen for ‘anti-Americanism’ in immigration applications, a move critics liken to McCarthyism​

By Jessie Yeung, CNN​

​

Updated: 11:51 PM EDT, Tue August 19, 2025​

Source: CNN​

​

People applying to live or work in the United States will now be screened for “anti-Americanism,” including having their social media checked, authorities announced on Tuesday, in a tightening of restrictions that has alarmed immigration advocates and lawyers.​

​

Immigration officers will be able to look at whether applicants have had “any involvement in anti-American or terrorist organizations,” or whether there is any “evidence of antisemitic activity,” said the policy update by US Citizenship & Immigration Services (USCIS).​

​

Social media vetting, already introduced into immigration screening in June by the Trump administration, will be expanded to include searches for any “anti-American activity,” it said.​

​

It’s the latest step in the administration’s crackdown on immigration regulations, with many new actions likely to deter immigrants and international students from coming to the US.​

​

The State Department has revoked more than 6,000 student visas this year, an official said on Monday. And in June, the State Department said embassies and consulates must vet student visa applicants for “hostile attitudes towards our citizens, culture, government, institutions, or founding principles.”​

​

“America’s benefits should not be given to those who despise the country and promote anti-American ideologies,” said USCIS spokesperson Matthew Tragesser in a news release on Tuesday.​

​

He added that the immigration agency was “committed to implementing policies and procedures that root out anti-Americanism and supporting the enforcement of rigorous screening and vetting measures to the fullest extent possible.”​

​

The policy update did not give a specific definition for “anti-Americanism,” only saying this included those who supported “antisemitic terrorism, antisemitic terrorist organizations, and antisemitic ideologies.”​

​

But it pointed to a section of the 1952 Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) for examples of “anti-American” ideologies. The section in the Act, the US’ overarching legal framework for immigration, bans certain people from becoming naturalized citizens – including members of various Communist parties, those who advocate for “world communism,” those who write or distribute materials opposing “all organized government,” or those who wish to overthrow the US government by force or violence.​

​

The announcement immediately stoked confusion and alarm, with online forums debating what counted as “anti-American.” Many worried that the vague wording and lack of clear definition would give immigration officers the power to crack down further on immigration, regardless of a genuine threat.​

​

“Is being against the recent strike in Iran or being in favor of a cease fire in Gaza anti-American or antisemitic?” read one Reddit post in an immigration discussion. “What if you personally don’t like Trump as a President or you shared a post on the recent South Park episodes making fun of him (and Homeland Security Secretary Kristi) Noem?”​

​

Immigration experts and lawyers are worried, too.​

​

“The term (anti-Americanism) has no prior precedent in immigration law and its definition is entirely up to the Trump (administration),” said Aaron Reichlin-Melnick, a senior fellow at the American Immigration Council, in a post on X.​

​

He added that the move was reminiscent of McCarthyism – the period of the 1950s also known as the Red Scare, when authorities prosecuted left-wing individuals amid a widespread public panic over communism and its influence on American institutions.​

​

Steven Brown, an immigration attorney based in Houston, also posted on X that so-called American values were “a subjective standard not found in the INA.”​

​

“For me, the really big story is they are opening the door for stereotypes and prejudice and implicit bias to take the wheel in these decisions. That’s really worrisome,” said Jane Lilly Lopez, associate professor of sociology at Brigham Young University, according to the Associated Press.​

​

“It means you are going to just do a whole lot more work to provide evidence that you meet our standards,” Lopez said.​

​

See Full Web Article​

​

​

​

 

[waybomb]

One portion should be finding out if the wannabes have any criminal record at all including misdemeanors in their country.
That's not subjective at all.

 

[tommu56]

They need to live up to their oath (especially those in office)

"I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty, of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen; that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I will bear arms on behalf of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform noncombatant service in the Armed Forces of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform work of national importance under civilian direction when required by the law; and that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; so help me God."

 

[waybomb]

Many, if not most, can't even read that much less speak it.

 

[Melensdad]

Many, if not most, can't even read that much less speak it.

True, but the people who take the citizenship test actually usually learn English and a proud to say it. It's the people who intend to import their own culture and impose it on us, plus the freeloaders and illegals that don't become a real part of American solidity.