A new proposal to eliminate dual citizenship for Americans—legislation that could directly affect First Lady Melania Trump and her son, Barron—has drawn criticism from a prominent immigration attorney who previously represented the first lady.
In an exclusive interview with Newsweek, Michael Wildes questioned both the premise and the practicality of Moreno’s proposal.
Why It Matters
Senator Bernie Moreno’s proposal to end dual citizenship has sparked unusually high-stakes debate, not only because it would force millions of Americans to choose between nationalities, but because it also reaches into the president’s own household.
The bill challenges decades of Supreme Court precedent protecting citizens from involuntary loss of nationality, and Wildes—who previously represented Melania Trump—argues it overlooks the reality of mixed-status families and millions of Americans born with more than one citizenship.
As the legislation moves into the Senate process, it raises fundamental questions about national identity, constitutional limits, and how far the government can go in redefining what it means to be an American.
What To Know
What The Bill Would Do
Senator Bernie Moreno’s Exclusive Citizenship Act of 2025 would prohibit U.S. citizens from holding any foreign nationality.
First Lady Melania Trump, who became a naturalized American in 2006, remains a dual citizen of the U.S. and Slovenia, as does her son Barron.
Michael Wildes, who is the managing partner of the immigration law firm Wildes & Weinberg, an adjunct professor at the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law, and mayor of Englewood, New Jersey, clarified the first lady’s immigration status during Donald Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign.
He spoke exclusively with Newsweek about Moreno’s proposal: “A bill without the force of law is simply a piece of paper,” Wildes said. “The United States is one of many countries that permits its citizens to hold dual nationality, whether acquired by the wonderful choice to naturalize or by virtue of birth.”
Wildes referenced early American history in challenging the bill’s argument about divided allegiance.
“Our founding parents and many of our first presidents were dual nationals of both the United States and other countries—including our then-enemy, Great Britain,” he said.
He added that “to claim that our military personnel are not loyal simply because they are not U.S. citizens, or that dual nationals cannot devote their full service to this country, is preposterous.”
He also criticized what he described as gaps in the bill’s logic, noting that it “does not address the large population of Americans who are born dual citizens or multinationals.”
According to Wildes, “America’s military presence abroad results in American citizens born overseas who are eligible for both U.S. and foreign citizenships.”
While declining to comment specifically on the Trump family’s citizenship status, Wildes said that “many of our clients come to us as dual nationals or as foreign nationals who wish to retain their current nationality after becoming American,” emphasizing that “there is great pride in retaining ties to one’s hometown or home country.”
He added that Senator Moreno himself “made the wonderful choice to become an American at the first opportunity,” and said he hoped the senator viewed himself “as part of this nation’s rich tapestry.”
Constitutional and Political Obstacles
Moreno has framed his bill as a matter of national loyalty, calling U.S. citizenship “an honor and a privilege” and arguing that “if you want to be an American, it’s all or nothing.”
But constitutional scholars have noted that longstanding Supreme Court precedent protects citizens from involuntary loss of nationality.
The bill now enters the committee process, where its prospects remain uncertain.
What People Are Saying
First Lady Melania Trump said: “I believe in the policies that my husband put together. Because I believe that we need to be very vigilant who is coming to the country,” adding that, “My personal experience of traversing the challenges of the immigration process opened my eyes to the harsh realities people face, including you, who try to become U.S. citizens.”
What Happens Next
Moreno’s dual-citizenship bill now moves into the Senate committee process, where its prospects are uncertain and any advancement would immediately run into constitutional hurdles, as longstanding Supreme Court precedent bars the government from revoking citizenship without a voluntary act.
If the proposal were to pass, federal agencies would be required to build a new system to identify and process all dual nationals—an unprecedented administrative task—while facing rapid legal challenges that would likely delay or halt implementation.
