Former Judge: Ilhan Omar Could Face Criminal Charges, Denaturalization Amid Probes
An ex-immigration judge suggests Representative Ilhan Omar could face legal jeopardy, including potential criminal charges and the revocation of her citizenship, due to ongoing federal investigations.
Representative Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., is under federal investigation for alleged immigration fraud and financial discrepancies, and a former immigration judge suggests these probes could lead to criminal charges and denaturalization.
Nathan Hansen, a former federal immigration judge, told Fox News Digital that if a naturalized citizen is convicted of a crime, it doesn't automatically trigger denaturalization, but it could be a factor in separate civil proceedings initiated by the Department of Justice. Denaturalization proceedings are distinct from any criminal case and are civil matters, typically handled by the Department of Homeland Security.
Omar's Washington, D.C., home was searched by Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) on Oct. 12, with agents reportedly seizing her phone, passport, and computer. Authorities also confirmed possession of her DNA. The investigation is reportedly tied to alleged immigration fraud concerning her citizenship paperwork or that of her late father, with sources indicating her "real name" may be Ilhan Nur Said Elmi.
Hansen suggested that statutes of limitations might not apply if fraud is involved, as fraud can toll such limitations. He noted that a conviction could potentially increase the likelihood of the Department of Justice pursuing denaturalization proceedings, though he described it as a discretionary matter for the department.
The former judge also commented on the broader context of immigration fraud, citing millions of pending immigration and removal cases across the country, including tens of thousands in Minnesota alone that lack scheduled court dates due to system backlogs. Hansen described this as an "overwhelming of the system" that is not functioning as intended.
He further explained that bogus asylum claims contribute to these backlogs. During his tenure as an immigration judge, Hansen frequently encountered asylum applications that lacked merit or were supported by fabricated documents. He recalled cases where applicants cited insults as grounds for asylum, which he found insufficient under U.S. law, contrasting it with the U.S. principle of freedom of speech.