I continue to get requests for updates about the DOJ-in-Exile project. The update is that while I got a lot of inquiries from people who were interested in being involved and a number of people who were interested in making large (5- or 6-figure contributions), I was not able to find someone or some entity to run it. Or I haven’t yet. And here I mean someone to organize and run it as opposed to do the actual work, which needs to be done at least mostly by people with experience as prosecutors. To be fair, it’s not like I’ve spent all my time on this. I have TPM; I have what I write each day; I have a book project. But a lot of people are scared. Possibly more so than I realized. And leerier as you go forward. But as things have developed over the last couple months I think the whole thing is more important now than I did at the outset. So I will continue to look and consider other possibilities including possibly launching and running it myself, at least at the outset. That’s the update. Remain very open to suggestions. This really needs to happen.

I’ve had several TPM Readers reply to the post below about denaturalization and say it’s actually even worse than I say. Specifically, that we can’t really have any confidence that people who were born citizens won’t face denaturalization too. One reader simply makes the point: why not? What’s the bar that is stopping that? And of course, sure: Anything can in theory happen. And some things that we would have thought were only possible in theory a decade ago are happening routinely now or appear on the horizon. Another reader, more concretely, notes that, while his ancestors have been here for a century, the Chinese Exclusion Act raises the possibility that some of his “natural-born” ancestors may not have been citizens after all and that could be applied against him.

I want to focus your attention on this new piece by Josh Kovensky on the DOJ appearing to open the door to denaturalizing citizens based on political activity or belief. I doubt I need to convince anyone reading this that this is a bad thing. But I want to underscore what is implicit in what is bad about it but needs to be as front and center as possible. The only cases in which denaturalization should ever be used are in the most extremes cases of egregious acts which, had they been disclosed prior to naturalization, would have barred citizenship in the first place. Even in most of those cases, the downsides usually outweigh the upsides. Because outside of the most extreme and unusual cases denaturalization is a stark threat to the equality of all American citizens.

I was born in the United States. Depending on what I do, the state can send me to war, imprison me, even execute me. But I can never stop being an American citizen unless I affirmatively renounce that citizenship. As long as that threat exists in any meaningful sense, no naturalized citizen is really my equal. Their membership in the club is contingent, contingent on behavior, which is to say not equal at all.