Why it Matters
The Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution will convene April 29 for the third installment of its "Protecting American Citizenship" series, this time focused on denaturalization and its constitutional limits. The hearing arrives as the Supreme Court weighs the future of birthright citizenship, as the Trump administration pursues stronger immigration enforcement, and as Republican senators move legislation that would make it easier to strip naturalized citizens of their status.
Legislation Driving the Debate
The hearing's most direct legislative hook is S.3674, the Stop Citizenship Abuse and Misrepresentation Act, known as the SCAM Act. The bill is sponsored by Sen. Eric Schmitt (R-MO), who also chairs the subcommittee convening the hearing, and is cosponsored by Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT), another subcommittee member.
The bill would expand the government's ability to pursue civil denaturalization against naturalized citizens who, within 10 years of obtaining citizenship, commit fraud against government programs involving at least $10,000, affiliate with foreign terrorist organizations, or commit aggravated felonies or espionage offenses. Critically, the bill treats such conduct as automatic evidence that the individual lacked "good moral character" at the time of naturalization, effectively reversing the burden of proof. If denaturalization is successful, citizenship would be voided retroactively from the original grant date, making the individual immediately subject to removal proceedings.
A House companion bill, H.R.7156, has been introduced by Rep. Tom Emmer (R-MN) and carries 50 Republican cosponsors, signaling broad GOP appetite for the policy.
A separate bill, S.2274, the Constitutional Citizenship Clarification Act of 2025, would restrict birthright citizenship for children born in the U.S. to parents who are unlawfully present, present for diplomatic purposes, or engaged in hostile operations against the United States. That bill, sponsored by Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR), codifies exceptions to the 14th Amendment's citizenship clause based on the principle that citizenship requires allegiance and obedience to U.S. law.
What Members Are Saying
The constitutional limits hearing comes after weeks of pointed public statements from members of the subcommittee on both sides of the debate.
Schmitt, the chair, argued on April 1 that "we must upend the New Deal Era perversion of American sovereignty that is unlimited Birthright Citizenship," warning that the current policy creates "a permanent underclass of 'citizens' that are foreign nationals."
Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) echoed that framing on the same day, writing that "the 14th Amendment does not empower illegal aliens to give birth in the U.S. to ensure their children automatically become citizens." In the days since, Blackburn has continued pressing the issue, calling on the Senate to pass her Ban Birth Tourism Act and urging passage of the SAVE America Act, which would require proof of citizenship to register to vote.
Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX), also a subcommittee member, weighed in on April 1 as the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the birthright citizenship case, writing that the Court "would be wise to strike it down."
Democrats on the subcommittee have pushed back sharply. Sen. Alex Padilla (D-CA) called the 14th Amendment "crystal clear," writing that "all persons born or naturalized in the United States are citizens of the United States" and that "Donald Trump doesn't have the power to rewrite the Constitution with an executive order." Sen. Mazie K. Hirono (D-HI) made a similar argument, writing that "just because Trump doesn't believe in the Constitution, doesn't mean he can ignore it."
The hearing's ranking member, Sen. Peter Welch (D-VT), has not issued public statements captured in the available data specifically on the denaturalization question.
The Lobbying Landscape
Outside groups have been active on the citizenship legislation heading into the constitutional limits hearing, with disclosures reflecting organized advocacy on both sides.
ACT! for America reported $10,000 in first-quarter 2026 lobbying specifically on S.3674, the SCAM Act, alongside the SAVE America Act and legislation to end Temporary Protected Status. The organization's related PAC, PAC FOR AMERICA, contributed $5,000 to Sen. Marsha Blackburn's campaign committee and $5,000 to Sen. Ted Cruz's reelection effort, among $106,000 in total contributions to Republican senators over the past two years.
NumbersUSA Action Inc. filed multiple disclosures throughout 2025 on birthright citizenship legislation, including HR 569 and S. 304, the Birthright Citizenship Acts. The organization described its lobbying as "focused on numeric impacts of federal immigration policy, including support for border enforcement and immigration policies that protect American jobs and wages."
On the other side of the debate, MoveOn.org Civic Action reported $20,000 in third-quarter 2025 lobbying in which it "advocated on issues related to birthright citizenship." Its affiliated PAC contributed $25,000 to Democratic candidates over the same period, though none of those contributions went to Senate Judiciary Committee members.
Voter eligibility legislation has also drawn active lobbying. The Voter Participation Center reported $30,000 in first-quarter 2026 lobbying on issues related to voter registration and the SAVE Act. The Center for Election Innovation & Research Inc. reported $20,000 in first-quarter 2026 lobbying specifically on the SAVE America Act.
The Bottom Line
The Senate Judiciary Committee hearing lands at a moment when the legal architecture of birthright citizenship is itself unsettled. The Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the birthright citizenship case on April 1, the same day multiple subcommittee members issued public statements on the issue. The Court's eventual ruling could render some of the legislative proposals before the subcommittee either unnecessary or constitutionally precarious, depending on how broadly or narrowly the justices interpret the 14th Amendment's citizenship clause.
For naturalized citizens, the stakes of the SCAM Act are more immediate. If enacted, the legislation would create new pathways for the government to pursue civil denaturalization proceedings, with citizenship treated as void from the original grant date upon a successful case. That retroactive effect means affected individuals would face removal without the procedural protections that currently accompany criminal denaturalization proceedings.
The subcommittee's hearing is chaired by Schmitt, whose own legislation is the most directly relevant bill under examination. No witnesses have been announced ahead of the April 29 session.
Access the Legis1 platform for comprehensive political news, data, and insights.