Demonstrators take part in an anti-Trump protest, after a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agent fatally shot Renee Nicole Good on January 7 during an immigration raid, outside of the Capitol building, in St. Paul, Minnesota, U.S., January 20, 2026. REUTERS/Tim Evans
New York Times opinion columnist Carlos Lozada unleashed a defiant counterattack against the Trump administration's aggressive push to strip naturalized Americans of their citizenship, publishing a searing essay that reads like a personal manifesto wrapped in constitutional fury.
Lozada, himself a naturalized citizen who became American in 2014 after immigrating from Peru as a child, methodically dismantled the administration's rationale for denaturalizing immigrants it deems politically inconvenient. The president has said he'd revoke citizenship from those who are "dishonest," "complain too much," "cause trouble," or "hate our country" — vague standards the columnist noted are wildly subjective and politically motivated.
The administration has targeted 100 to 200 denaturalization cases monthly, a staggering increase from the historical average of just 11 per year between 1990 and 2017.
Lozada delivered a powerful argument that the U.S. cannot truly denaturalize someone without erasing their entire life.
"You would have to revoke my life," he wrote, walking readers through decades of his personal journey toward Americanness, from childhood memories of his father calling America "este país" (this country) to his votes, his children born in Washington D.C., and his career chronicling American politics.
The columnist also took aim at Vice President JD Vance's reframing of America as a geographic homeland for bloodline descendants rather than a nation of ideals, calling such rhetoric fundamentally un-American.
"Is it worth it? Is purging America of immigrants so crucial that in the process you must unmake America itself? Or is this how you intend to denaturalize me — by turning the country I joined into one I cannot recognize?" he asked.