Immigrants seeking to become U.S. citizens could soon face a much tougher naturalization exam under proposals floated this week by the Trump administration, raising concerns that the changes would create new barriers to legal immigration.
Speaking at an event hosted by the Center for Immigration Studies in Washington, Joseph Edlow, director of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), said the current citizenship test is “too easy” and needs to be “more thought-provoking.”
“We need to know more, especially if we’re going to really understand whether someone has a true attachment to the Constitution as required by the statute,” Edlow said. He suggested adding essay-style questions, such as “What does it mean to be an American?” or “Who was your favorite founding father?” He also raised the possibility of questions designed to assess ideological commitment, not just factual knowledge.
Currently, the naturalization exam consists of two parts: an English language test and a civics test. For civics, applicants study 100 possible questions about U.S. history and government, of which they are asked 10. To pass, they must answer six correctly. Questions range from constitutional principles, such as “What stops one branch of government from becoming too powerful?” to historical topics, like “Why did the colonists fight the British?”
Edlow argued that simple questions such as “name two federal holidays” or “name your governor” do not adequately reflect the responsibilities of citizenship. He also said USCIS would increase scrutiny of applicants’ “good moral character,” expanding checks for what he called “anti-American” views.
“I am declaring war on fraud,” Edlow said. “I am declaring war on anyone that is coming to this country and wants to get a benefit, but doesn’t want the responsibility of what it means to actually be a U.S. citizen.”
The proposed changes come as USCIS has taken on expanded enforcement powers, including expedited removal authority and the ability to investigate civil and criminal immigration violations—shifts critics say blur the traditional line between naturalization services and immigration enforcement.
Experts warn that introducing essays or subjective measures could raise fairness concerns. “Adding an essay section would raise questions about how it would be judged, and by whom,” said Daniel Kanstroom, a professor at Boston College Law School. He noted that while the test has been revised many times in the past, the Trump administration’s framing suggests a deeper redefinition of citizenship.
“The question comes down to are we a fundamentally open country or are we a fundamentally closed country,” Kanstroom said. “That’s what is at stake here.”
The proposals follow an August USCIS memo calling for a more “rigorous, holistic” evaluation of applicants’ character. For many advocates, the push reflects the administration’s broader effort to restrict both legal and illegal immigration.
While no formal rule changes have been announced, Edlow’s remarks signal that immigrants preparing for naturalization could soon face a significantly more demanding path.
