By The Craig Bushon Show Media Team
America is now confronting one of the most consequential citizenship debates in its history. A new proposal in Congress, the Exclusive Citizenship Act of 2025, would end dual citizenship for all Americans—forcing millions of people to choose between the United States and every other country on earth.
The bill, introduced by Senator Bernie Moreno of Ohio and amplified by coverage from Aviation A2Z, claims that a modern America cannot tolerate “divided allegiance.” Under this plan, an American with two citizenships must give one up. Anyone gaining a foreign citizenship in the future would automatically lose their U.S. citizenship. Those currently holding dual citizenship would have just one year to decide which identity to keep.
Some Americans hear this and instinctively respond to the idea of unity. One nation. One allegiance. One flag. In an era of global instability, foreign influence, and border insecurity, people want certainty.
But once you begin examining this proposal beyond the headline, the reality becomes far more complex. Constitutional barriers, national security miscalculations, economic fallout, foreign policy complications, and serious family disruptions all emerge. Washington hasn’t addressed these realities, and the national media isn’t asking.
That’s why this debate demands a deeper conversation—one The Craig Bushon Show is ready to have.
The National Security Blind Spot Nobody Is Talking About
Ironically, a blanket ban on dual citizenship may harm national security more than it could ever protect it.
Thousands of U.S. military linguists, cyber analysts, intelligence specialists, and defense contractors hold dual citizenship. Their global ties—language, cultural fluency, regional expertise—strengthen America’s capabilities. Removing them would cause talent shortages in critical fields at a time when the U.S. is already struggling to compete with China, Russia, Iran, and other adversaries in cyber, space, and information warfare.
Loyalty issues should be addressed through targeted vetting, not by banning millions of globally connected Americans from serving their country.
The Constitutional Clash Washington Is Ignoring
The bill’s core enforcement mechanism—automatic loss of U.S. citizenship if someone acquires a foreign one—is flatly unconstitutional.
Supreme Court precedents such as Afroyim v. Rusk and Vance v. Terrazas reaffirm that the government cannot revoke citizenship automatically. The individual must voluntarily intend to relinquish it.
Congress cannot override these rulings with a simple statute. This makes the bill unenforceable in its current form, and ensures that the moment it passes, it will be tied up in litigation.
Washington knows this. They aren’t saying it.
The Human Impact: Millions Would Be Forced Into Life-Altering Choices
Millions of Americans hold dual citizenship through circumstances beyond their control. A child born in another country to American parents. A baby born in the U.S. to immigrant parents. Adults whose ancestral citizenship was automatically granted by a foreign nation. Marriages that create multi-national households.
Are these the people Congress intends to force into renunciation proceedings? Would teenagers be required to choose between their American identity and the heritage of a parent? What happens to Americans whose foreign property or family obligations legally require them to maintain another nationality?
This proposal is not just policy—it is disruption at the most personal level of family life.
The Economic Fallout Washington Has Not Modeled
Dual citizens contribute to American business and economic growth through aviation partnerships, agriculture trade, technology development, global consulting, foreign investment, and cross-border entrepreneurship.
Ending dual citizenship abruptly would:
limit U.S. business expansion
complicate inheritance and property ownership
cause tax and regulatory chaos
push foreign investors away
harm American competitiveness globally
Congress has presented no economic impact study whatsoever.
The Global Fallout: Allies Won’t Sit Still
If America bans dual citizenship, foreign governments will respond.
They may:
tighten visas for Americans
restrict residency and work rights
change tax or property rules
retaliate diplomatically
This would affect tourists, missionaries, students, military families, retirees abroad, and American workers stationed overseas.
The bill does not address any of this.
The Political Ramifications Beneath the Surface
Certain diaspora communities—Mexican-American, Indian-American, Chinese-American, Caribbean-American, Middle Eastern-American—have higher rates of dual citizenship. Forcing these groups to choose could shift political demographics.
Whether intended or not, this bill carries political implications hidden beneath the language of “loyalty.”
Historical Reality: America Has Never Gone This Far
Even during the Civil War, two World Wars, and the Cold War, the U.S. did not attempt a nationwide ban on dual citizenship. The current policy has existed for half a century because it works, it’s constitutional, and it reflects the realities of a global world.
The Exclusive Citizenship Act abandons American tradition, not defends it.
A Smarter Path Forward: Focus on Future Immigrants, Not Punishing Current Citizens
If America wants to modernize citizenship rules, there is a fair, constitutional, and stable way to do it. You apply new expectations to the future—not backward onto citizens who built their lives under long-standing law.
A responsible framework would begin by grandfathering every current U.S. citizen. No dual citizen loses rights they already hold. No families are torn apart. No children are forced into geopolitical decisions they don’t understand.
For future naturalized citizens, Congress could establish clear expectations at the time of naturalization. If exclusive allegiance is required, it must be stated plainly and voluntarily before the oath, not retroactively applied decades later.
Reforms should focus on roles where dual citizenship genuinely creates risk—certain intelligence positions, nuclear programs, and top national security roles—rather than on everyday people.
Instead of automatic exile, the law should require future immigrants to disclose any retained citizenship when seeking federal employment or security clearance. Transparency, not punishment, solves the real problem.
Children should retain any citizenship acquired at birth until adulthood, when they may choose voluntarily—never by force or parental coercion.
Border security, vetting, and the integrity of the naturalization process itself should be strengthened. Allegiance concerns are best addressed at the front door of immigration—not by stripping legal rights from longtime Americans.
A Targeted Retroactive Reform: No Dual Citizens in U.S. Public Office
There is one retroactive reform that is constitutional, enforceable, and philosophically sound: prohibit dual citizens from holding certain public offices in the United States.
This does not take away anyone’s citizenship. It simply ensures that individuals who seek power, not individuals living normal lives, must meet a higher standard of allegiance.
A modern standard would forbid dual citizens from serving in Congress, the Cabinet, national security leadership, intelligence agencies, ambassadorial posts, and other sensitive federal roles.
This mirrors the Constitution’s existing restrictions for the presidency and vice presidency. It safeguards national security at the top without destabilizing society at the bottom.
If you want the privilege of governing the United States, you must choose one flag.
For the average American, their rights stay intact.
The Exclusive Citizenship Act of 2025 is being sold as a simple matter of loyalty, but beneath that slogan lies constitutional conflict, national security risks, economic disruption, political motivations, and widespread family hardship.
America does need an updated discussion about allegiance and citizenship in a global era—but it must be constitutional, targeted, forward-looking, and humane. The smarter path is to apply new rules to the future, protect current citizens, and restrict dual citizenship only in the narrow arena of public office and national security where it truly matters.
On The Craig Bushon Show, we don’t just follow the headlines.
We read between the lines to get to the bottom line of what’s really going on.
Disclaimer
This op-ed represents the analysis and editorial opinion of The Craig Bushon Show Media Team. It is based on publicly available information, legal precedent, and policy proposals as of the date of publication. Nothing in this article is legal advice, and readers should consult qualified professionals for guidance on individual circumstances. The intent is to inform, analyze, and stimulate public discussion on matters of national importance.
