Why the United States Cannot End Dual Citizenship Without Changing the Constitution The key protection for dual citizenship in the United States comes from Afroyim v. Rusk (1967). In that landmark case, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Congress does not have the power to strip a person of their U.S. citizenship without their voluntary consent. Citizenship can only be lost if the individual intentionally chooses to give it up. Because of Afroyim, the United States accepts that many forms of dual citizenship are constitutionally protected. This includes situations where: • a person becomes a U.S. citizen while retaining another nationality, or • a U.S. citizen later acquires a foreign citizenship. Current U.S. law, including the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), also permits dual nationality. There is no requirement for new Americans to renounce prior citizenships when naturalizing. Under this constitutional framework, dual or multiple citizenship is allowed. Since this protection stems from the Fourteenth Amendment and more than 50 years of Supreme Court interpretation, Congress cannot eliminate dual citizenship simply by passing a new law. Any statute banning dual citizenship or automatically revoking citizenship from dual nationals would almost certainly be ruled unconstitutional. This is why proposals such as the Exclusive Citizenship Act of 2025 face serious legal obstacles. That bill would require American dual nationals to renounce their foreign citizenship or lose U.S. citizenship. But this contradicts Afroyim, which holds that citizenship cannot be taken away merely because of passive status, such as holding another passport. Loss of citizenship must always be voluntary, not automatic. For the United States to truly abolish dual citizenship—especially for existing dual nationals—it would require: 1. A constitutional amendment, or 2. A major shift in Supreme Court doctrine, reversing or significantly narrowing Afroyim.#Citizenship #DualCitizen