The question of why Republicans want to strip Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) of her citizenship would matter a great deal to any court that takes up the case, even though it isn’t the legal issue itself, California-based attorney Dilan Esper wrote in a thread posted to X on Friday.
Omar, a Somali-American lawmaker who came to the United States as a child refugee, is a frequent target of attacks by President Donald Trump and MAGA activists. In an escalation against her, federal agents searched her D.C. home on Monday, weeks after border czar Tom Homan confirmed a criminal investigation into her naturalization.
The administration is building a case to strip Omar of her citizenship and ultimately deport her, The Wall Street Journal reported. Investigators are focused on whether her birth date was misstated on immigration paperwork so she could derive citizenship through her father as a minor, according to The Washington Post. Omar has denied wrongdoing, calling the probe an attempt “to target political enemies and weaponize federal law enforcement,” and has not been charged.
“WHY do Republicans want to strip Omar of citizenship?” Esper asked.
He argued the answer isn’t simply a belief that she’s not a citizen. “If some random waitress working in a Somali restaurant in Minneapolis was improperly granted citizenship, have you been calling for the federal government to smoke that out? No.”
In his view, Omar’s position is the draw.
“The reason why some Republicans would love to get Ilhan Omar on this is because she’s in Congress. That’s a key part of why this whole thing is attractive and fun and tempting for them. She’s a left wing Dem congresswoman and they love to get her kicked out.”
That motive matters, Esper said, because of the separation of powers. “The entire design of the Constitution included preventing Presidents from screwing with Congress. It really did. There’s multiple provisions on this.”
He said many people intrigued by the investigation are missing how a court would see it.
“I think a lot of people who are intrigued by this investigation are thinking ‘we’ve found this plausible argument that ALLOWS the President to screw with Congress in this one instance’, but that’s not how a court will see this.”
Instead, he said, judges will focus on the Constitution’s purpose.
“A court will see this as ‘the entire point was to prevent Presidents from screwing with Congress, because Congress is what checks Presidents who seek dictatorial powers, so we’re not going to allow a workaround through citizenship law’.”
Esper also criticized the partisan framing of the effort.
“We have this facade that partisans do where they pretend they are just enforcing some neutral principle and how dare anyone stop them from doing this.”
“But going after Rep. Omar is not any neutral principle. It’s looking for a way to get a Democrat, who Republicans can’t stand, kicked out of Congress without the votes to beat her in an election or win an expulsion vote. And it’s not in any way outrageous to call that out.”
His bottom line was that judges won’t be hunting for a way to approve it. “Any court hearing this will not be looking for the reason why it can grant Presidents the power to screw with Congress. It will be looking for the reason to find this illegal, because of course, Presidents do not have the power to screw with Congress.”