Bernie Moreno, my senator, has just introduced the Exclusive American Citizenship Act of 2025 to abolish dual citizenship in the United States. I hope this is merely a political stunt, particularly because the legality of dual citizenship was decided long ago by the Supreme Court. Under the proposed law, citizens would have one year to either keep their U.S. citizenship and renounce any others or give up their U.S. citizenship entirely.
Moreno argues that dual citizens cannot be fully loyal and therefore cannot be trusted as true Americans. This argument is not new. Throughout American history, racial, ethnic, and cultural identities have been weaponized to claim divided allegiance: Japanese Americans imprisoned during World War II, Black voters barred through literacy tests in the Jim Crow South, and countless others who were told their belonging was conditional. It is a tactic of othering.
For Jews, the accusation of divided loyalty is especially familiar.
The question of whether Jews were a religion, a people, or a nation haunted European discourse for centuries. In post-revolutionary France, Jews were finally granted citizenship, only after Napoleon convened the Grand Sanhedrin to interrogate Jewish law and determine whether Jews could be loyal citizens or whether they would remain separate. The Sanhedrin affirmed that Jews could faithfully observe their religion while serving France as devoted citizens. It was a significant moment: Jews were finally recognized as citizens of a nation rather than an ethno-religious anomaly. Yet history proves that even when Jews pledge loyalty, serve in government and the military, and contribute meaningfully to their countries, accusations of mixed allegiance have been used to strip rights and fuel persecution. Moreno’s proposal echoes that dangerous logic in modern legal language.
My own family story reflects this tension.
My grandmother was born in Germany and fled the Holocaust, but the rest of my family has lived in Cincinnati for five generations. We have been proud American citizens, grateful for the safety, prosperity, and opportunities this country has provided. Because of those freedoms, my family and my Jewish community have thrived in medicine, law, banking, business, and academia. We have served, led, and given back.
I know many dual citizens of the United States and Israel, or the United States and other nations, who are no less committed or active in American civic life. Moreno’s claim that dual citizenship inherently creates disloyalty is what makes this proposal dangerous. When Jews received citizenship in France, critics argued that Jews would always prioritize Jewish loyalty over national loyalty. The rabbis answered that one could be a member of the Jewish community and a loyal citizen, and that citizenship came first. That is why many of us identify proudly as Jewish Americans.
History proved those promises fragile. Even Jews who fought for their countries were later stripped of citizenship and rights. In my family, my grandmother’s uncle served as a medic in the German army during World War I. Only a short time later, as antisemitism escalated, his citizenship was revoked along with the citizenship of all Jews. I am still researching my family from Munich and have already identified more than twenty relatives murdered or persecuted in the Holocaust.
For me, this proposal is not an abstract policy. It echoes a long pattern in which questioning someone’s allegiance becomes a way to question whether they deserve to belong at all. Even for those who hold only American citizenship, introducing the idea that identity, heritage, or community affiliation makes someone less trustworthy opens the door to defining who counts as a “real American.” It has happened before.
Moreno’s bill may never become law, but it is gaining attention. Attention plants seeds, and seeds grow.
If we allow this framing to take root, we risk moving away from a vision of a nation strengthened by multiple identities and shared purpose. Instead, we step toward division, suspicion, and exclusion where belonging is conditional, and citizenship can be questioned rather than assumed.
