New Act Guarantees Citizenship Ceremony Spot for Approved Applicants, Limits DHS Exclusions to Fraud or Ineligibility

If you’ve ever waited for a crucial final sign-off at work or in a loan process, you know the anxiety of having everything approved only to hit a last-minute snag. That’s essentially what the Naturalization and Oath Ceremony Protection Act aims to prevent for people on the final step of becoming U.S. citizens.

This bill establishes a clear legal right for anyone whose naturalization application has been approved under section 335 of the Immigration and Nationality Act to actually attend their scheduled ceremony, take the Oath of Allegiance, and finally receive their certificate. Think of it as solidifying the finish line; once you’re approved, the government can’t arbitrarily move the goalposts.

The End of Last-Minute Denial Surprises

Before this Act, the final stage—the oath ceremony—could sometimes feel like a high-stakes, last-minute review, where applicants could be pulled aside and denied without clear recourse. This bill sharply limits the Secretary of Homeland Security’s (DHS) power to bar an approved applicant from the ceremony.

Under this new rule, the only two acceptable reasons for exclusion are if the applicant is later found to be statutorily ineligible for citizenship, or if the original approval was obtained through fraud or willful misrepresentation of a material fact. That’s it. No more vague, catch-all reasons for exclusion.

Crucially, the bill prohibits DHS from excluding an applicant based on things like their nationality, country of origin, or place of birth. It also bans exclusions based on general policies or being included in a categorical review (like a general risk designation) that isn't based on an individual assessment. This means no more profiling or general sweeps that catch eligible people in the net.

Due Process: Setting the Rules for Exclusion

The bill forces DHS to play by strict due process rules if they want to bar someone. If the Secretary determines an applicant should be excluded, they must provide written notice detailing the specific factual and legal basis for the denial. This notice must be served at least 10 days before the ceremony, giving the applicant time to prepare a written response and argue their case. Furthermore, any such denial requires supervisory approval from an officer who wasn't involved in the original application decision, adding a necessary layer of oversight.

There is a small, necessary exception: the 10-day notice can be waived in “exigent circumstances,” but this exception is not clearly defined in the text, which could be a point of concern. For example, if new, clear evidence of fraud surfaces just days before the ceremony, DHS might use this clause to act quickly.

National Security and Judicial Review

The bill does allow for a temporary pause in cases involving national security, but it’s highly constrained. In “extraordinary circumstances involving a specific and credible national security threat,” DHS can postpone the oath for up to 30 days. This requires individualized findings and written notice 72 hours before the ceremony, ensuring this power isn't used lightly or broadly.

Perhaps the biggest win for applicants is the guarantee of judicial review. If DHS denies or postpones a ceremony in violation of this Act, the applicant can take the agency to court. The bill explicitly states that failing to administer the oath in violation of these rules is considered an “unlawful withholding of agency action.” If an applicant wins in court, they are eligible to recover reasonable attorneys' fees and costs, and DHS must reschedule the oath ceremony within 10 days of the court order. This puts real teeth into the due process requirements and holds the agency accountable for its decisions.