The Trump administration has directed U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) to implement a more comprehensive and subjective evaluation of the “good moral character” (GMC) requirement for immigrants applying for U.S. citizenship. This policy shift, detailed in a memorandum issued around August 15, 2025, moves away from a checklist of disqualifying offenses toward a “holistic assessment” of an applicant’s overall conduct and contributions to society.
For decades, demonstrating good moral character has been a cornerstone of the naturalization process. Typically, legal permanent residents (green card holders) must prove they have maintained GMC for a statutory period of three to five years before applying. Historically, this assessment focused on the absence of specific criminal activities and behaviors outlined in the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), such as murder, aggravated felonies, or being a “habitual drunkard.”
Under the new guidance, USCIS officers are instructed to conduct more than a “cursory mechanical review focused on the absence of wrongdoing.” Instead, they must perform a holistic evaluation of an applicant’s behavior, adherence to societal norms, and positive contributions. According to a report from CBS News, this means placing a “greater emphasis” on positive attributes. These can include community involvement, family caregiving, educational achievements, a history of stable and lawful employment, and consistent tax payment.
Conversely, the policy also mandates “greater scrutiny” of negative factors that extend beyond the traditional statutory bars. Officers will now consider “acts that are contrary to the average behavior of citizens in the jurisdiction where aliens reside.” This could encompass actions that are “technically lawful” but deemed inconsistent with civic responsibility, such as “reckless or habitual traffic infractions, or harassment or aggressive solicitation,” as noted in the USCIS memorandum. The USCIS Policy Manual lists numerous conditional bars, including multiple DUI convictions, willful failure to support dependents, and engaging in an extramarital affair that tends to destroy an existing marriage.
The administration has defended the change as a necessary step to protect the integrity of the naturalization process. In a statement to news outlets, USCIS chief spokesman Matthew Tragesser said the directive is an effort to “restore integrity” to the immigration system. “U.S. citizenship is the gold standard of citizenship — it should only be offered to the world’s best of the best,” Tragesser stated, adding that the new element ensures America’s newest citizens demonstrate good moral character beyond simply avoiding misconduct.
However, the policy has drawn criticism from immigration advocates and former officials. Doug Rand, a former senior USCIS official, suggested the policy is designed to intimidate legal immigrants and grant officers more leeway to deny applications. “They’re trying to increase the grounds for denial of U.S. citizenship by kind of torturing the definition of good moral character to encompass extremely harmless behavior,” Rand told CBS News, citing the inclusion of traffic infractions.
This change is consistent with the administration’s broader efforts to tighten both legal and illegal immigration pathways. While high-profile actions have focused on border security and deportations, a series of less-publicized administrative changes have aimed to restrict legal immigration benefits, including shutting down refugee admissions and implementing stricter vetting procedures for visa and green card applicants.
Ultimately, the new policy grants immigration officers significantly more discretion in adjudicating citizenship applications. For the 600,000 to 1 million immigrants who seek to naturalize annually, the path to becoming a U.S. citizen will now involve a more subjective and in-depth examination of their life, where positive community ties are weighed against even minor transgressions.
