SCAM Act
- Bill Number
- S. 3674
- Origin Chamber
- Senate
- Congress
- 119th Congress, Session 2
- Policy Area
- Immigration
- Status
- Introduced
- Latest Action
- 2026-01-26: Read the second time. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 301.
- Last Updated
- 2026-03-19T11:03:28Z
AI-Generated Summary
Purpose of the Legislation
The "Stop Citizenship Abuse and Misrepresentation Act" (SCAM Act) aims to broaden and make clearer the reasons the U.S. government can strip naturalized citizenship (a process called denaturalization) from individuals who, after becoming citizens, commit acts like defrauding government programs, joining terrorist groups, or certain serious crimes. These acts are treated as strong proof that the person did not meet the basic requirements for citizenship—such as having good moral character, loyalty to the U.S. Constitution, and a positive attitude toward the country's well-being—at the time they were naturalized.
Key Provisions
- Short Title: The bill is named the "Stop Citizenship Abuse and Misrepresentation Act" or "SCAM Act."
- Findings and Sense of Congress: The bill states that naturalized citizenship involves serious responsibilities, and certain post-citizenship actions (like fraud, terrorism links, or serious crimes) show the person was never truly qualified. It references Supreme Court cases supporting denaturalization for fraud or misrepresentation and criticizes a 1964 ruling (Costello v. INS) for limiting denaturalization effects, aligning instead with a 2025 court opinion.
- Amendments to Immigration Law: Updates Section 340 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), which governs denaturalization:
- Allows the Attorney General (in addition to existing officials) to start denaturalization proceedings.
- Adds new grounds based on actions within 10 years of naturalization, treating them as "prima facie" evidence (meaning presumed true unless proven otherwise) that citizenship was wrongly obtained:
- Membership in a Foreign Terrorist Organization (new subsection d): Associating, conspiring, aiding, or abetting a designated terrorist group (e.g., drug cartels) proves lack of moral character and loyalty at naturalization time.
- Defrauding Government Programs (new subsection e): Conviction, admission, or acts amounting to fraud (or conspiracy to defraud) against federal, state, local, or tribal governments for at least $10,000 in benefits (e.g., public assistance programs) shows the same disqualifications.
- Committing Aggravated Felonies or Espionage (new subsection f): Conviction, admission, or acts for serious crimes like aggravated felonies (e.g., murder, drug trafficking) or espionage (spying offenses under U.S. criminal codes) within 10 years indicates ineligibility from the start.
- In all cases, citizenship revocation is retroactive to the original naturalization date, treating the certificate as void from issuance.
- Fallback Rule (new subsection g): If courts rule the 10-year window unconstitutional, it defaults to a 5-year period, based on a 1913 Supreme Court case.
- Effects of Denaturalization (new subsection h): Revoked citizens become removable (deportable) through fast-track proceedings, ignoring their prior status or time since naturalization.
- Severability: If any part is ruled unconstitutional, the rest remains in effect.
Significant Changes to Existing Law
- Expanded Grounds: Current INA law allows denaturalization mainly for fraud or concealment during the naturalization process itself. This bill adds post-naturalization actions (within 10 years) as automatic proof of original ineligibility, without needing to directly prove what happened at naturalization time.
- Lower Burden of Proof: Introduces "prima facie" evidence, making it easier for the government to win cases compared to the previous "clear, unequivocal, and convincing" standard for fraud.
- Broader Enforcement: Adds the Attorney General as a key actor alongside U.S. attorneys, potentially speeding up cases.
- Retroactivity and Removal: Makes denaturalization fully backward-looking and links it directly to expedited deportation, overriding some prior limits on how long after naturalization someone can be targeted.
- Critique of Precedent: Explicitly challenges a 1964 Supreme Court decision by endorsing a recent concurring opinion, aiming to restore stronger denaturalization powers.
Potential Impacts
- On Government Agencies: The Department of Justice (DOJ) and Department of Homeland Security (DHS), including Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), would handle more denaturalization and deportation cases, possibly increasing workloads but streamlining processes through presumptions and expedited removal. This could lead to higher enforcement costs but fewer prolonged court battles.
- On Citizens: Naturalized U.S. citizens engaging in specified fraud, terrorism, or crimes within 10 years risk losing citizenship, family separation, and deportation, even if they've lived in the U.S. for decades. It may deter such behaviors but create fear among law-abiding naturalized immigrants.
- On International Relations: Could strain ties with countries whose nationals (e.g., in drug cartels or espionage cases) are targeted, signaling a stricter U.S. stance on citizenship integrity. It might also affect diplomatic discussions on terrorism or immigration.
Main Stakeholders Affected
- Naturalized U.S. Citizens: Especially those from high-risk backgrounds (e.g., linked to terrorism-prone regions) or involved in fraud/crime; they face heightened scrutiny and potential loss of status.
- U.S. Government Agencies: DOJ for prosecutions, DHS/ICE for removals, and courts for handling increased caseloads.
- Immigrant Communities: Broader groups of naturalized citizens and their families, who may feel targeted and alter behaviors to avoid risks.
- Victims of Fraud or Crime: Government programs (federal, state, local, tribal) benefit from easier recovery of misused funds through denaturalization.
- Terrorism and Security Entities: Agencies like the FBI gain tools to address national security threats from within citizen ranks.
Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications
- Legal Implications: Lowers the evidentiary bar for denaturalization, potentially leading to more successful government cases but opening doors to appeals on fairness (e.g., whether post-naturalization acts truly prove original intent). The severability clause protects the bill's core if parts are struck down.
- Constitutional Implications: Raises due process concerns under the 5th Amendment (fair treatment in legal proceedings), as retroactive revocation treats citizenship as conditional and void from the start. The 10-year (or fallback 5-year) limit nods to time-based constitutional challenges, drawing on early 20th-century Supreme Court rulings that allowed challenges within reasonable periods after naturalization.
- Political Implications: Reinforces a policy of protecting citizenship as a privilege earned through ongoing good conduct, appealing to national security and anti-fraud priorities. It could spark debates on immigrant rights versus public safety, influencing future immigration reforms without directly altering deportation laws for non-citizens.
This summary was generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies. Refer to the official source document for the authoritative text.
Sponsor
Cosponsors (10)
Sen. Scott, Rick [R-FL], Sen. Graham, Lindsey [R-SC], Sen. Lee, Mike [R-UT], Sen. Hagerty, Bill [R-TN], Sen. Sheehy, Tim [R-MT], Sen. Budd, Ted [R-NC], Sen. Cassidy, Bill [R-LA], Sen. Lummis, Cynthia M. [R-WY], Sen. Moody, Ashley [R-FL], Sen. Cotton, Tom [R-AR]
Recent Actions
- 2026-01-26: Read the second time. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 301.
- 2026-01-15: Introduced in the Senate. Read the first time. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under Read the First Time.
- 2026-01-15: Introduced in Senate
Bill Versions
- Stop Citizenship Abuse and Misrepresentation Act — issued 2026-01-26 — PDF (14 pages)