Would ICE define a person, who gained legal US citizenship after entering the US illegally, an illegal immigrant?
Executive summary
A person who entered the United States illegally but later became a naturalized U.S. citizen would not be treated by ICE as an "illegal immigrant" for purposes of immigration enforcement, because ICE’s enforcement authority is aimed at noncitizens and U.S. citizenship changes a person’s legal status [1] [2]. Reporting and policy guides make clear that pathways exist for undocumented people to adjust status and naturalize, and once naturalized they cease to be removable as noncitizens under ordinary immigration enforcement metrics [3] [4].
1. How law and labels diverge: “illegal” describes presence, citizenship supersedes it
Immigration law and common usage use terms like “illegal immigrant” or “undocumented” to describe people who entered or remained in the United States without authorization [5] [6], but U.S. citizenship is a legal status that replaces prior categories once it is lawfully acquired; paths to permanent residence and citizenship exist for some who were once unauthorized [3] [4]. The Office of Homeland Security Statistics and immigration analysts distinguish citizenship and noncitizen status when reporting enforcement actions, because removals and detentions are actions taken against noncitizens, not against U.S. citizens [7] [1].
2. What ICE’s mandate actually covers — noncitizens, not citizens
ICE’s stated mission is to enforce federal immigration laws, detain and remove those who are present unlawfully, and focus interior enforcement on noncitizens who may be removable under the Immigration and Nationality Act [2] [1]. Public-facing DHS and ICE materials and enforcement data categorize enforcement activity by citizenship and criminality, reflecting that enforcement operations and the agency’s “book-ins” and removals are aimed at people identified as unauthorized or removable, i.e., noncitizens [7] [2].
3. Naturalization changes the enforcement calculus
Guides and legal explainers on pathways to legal status emphasize that adjustment to lawful permanent resident status and subsequent naturalization are the standard routes by which someone who once lacked lawful presence can become a U.S. citizen [3] [4]. Once an individual becomes a naturalized citizen, they are legally a U.S. citizen and are not part of the categories ICE enforces against as “illegal immigrants” in routine interior enforcement statistics and operations [1] [2]. Census and enforcement reporting likewise separate citizens from noncitizens when counting removals and detention bookings [7] [1].
4. Practical caveats, data framing, and what the sources don’t show
While ICE principally enforces against noncitizens [2] [1], enforcement datasets and public statements focus on arrests, detentions and removals of people identified as unauthorized or removable [7], and the sources provided do not include a detailed ICE internal directive expressly phrasing how officers should refer to or label a person with a history of illegal entry who later naturalized. Therefore reporting limitations mean it cannot be asserted from these sources whether individual ICE officers sometimes use imprecise language in the field; the legal distinction, however, remains clear in agency mission statements and policy explainer literature [2] [1].
5. Why the confusion persists — politics, shorthand, and public reporting
Public and political discourse often uses shorthand—“illegal immigrant”—to describe earlier conduct, which fuels confusion when someone later naturalizes; advocacy groups and legal resources instead emphasize statutory categories (citizen vs. noncitizen) and procedural remedies, while ICE’s public materials and enforcement data frame actions explicitly in terms of noncitizens and removable individuals [5] [3] [7]. The result is a tension between everyday language and the legal reality: media and political narratives may keep the “illegal” label alive as a rhetorical device, even though the agency’s legal authority targets noncitizens and removal processes do not apply to naturalized citizens as reflected in enforcement explanations [2] [1].