Which members of the 119th Congress have publicly disclosed foreign citizenships, and where are those disclosures recorded?

1. What the official records actually show about foreign birth and citizenship

The House Clerk has compiled a document titled “Foreign‑Born in the UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES” that records which House members were born outside the United States as of the start of the 119th Congress, and that document is the primary official roster for foreign‑born Representatives ^[1]; the Library of Congress/Congress.gov research profile of the 119th Congress likewise catalogs member characteristics including foreign birth and points readers to congressional biographical sources for details ^[2].

2. What journalistic analysis adds — counts and named examples

Independent analysis by the Pew Research Center reports that at least 80 lawmakers in the 119th Congress are foreign born or have at least one parent born abroad, including 61 in the House and 19 in the Senate, and Pew’s tabulation draws on CRS biographical data, congressional offices and news reports rather than a single disclosure ledger ^[3]; Pew names specific members as examples in its narrative — for instance Andy Kim (Senate) and Yassamin Ansari (House) among others cited in the center’s write‑up — but Pew’s piece is an aggregate demographic analysis, not a legal disclosure repository ^[3].

3. The difference between “foreign‑born” and “publicly disclosed foreign citizenship”

Being foreign‑born is a plainly reported biographical fact captured in Clerk and CRS records and compiled by researchers such as Pew, whereas “publicly disclosed foreign citizenship” implies an affirmative statement or legal filing acknowledging current non‑U.S. citizenship; the materials provided document counts of foreign‑born members and where those biographical facts are recorded (Clerk, CRS, Pew), but do not provide a comprehensive list of members who have filed statements specifically stating they hold citizenship in another country ^[1][2][3].

4. Where one would expect to find formal citizenship disclosures today

Proposed and existing mechanisms for recording dual citizenship include candidate filing statements and congressional ethics filings — for example, the Dual Loyalty Disclosure Act (H.R.2356) and prior bills would require candidates to disclose any citizenship of countries other than the United States on campaign filings or to congressional ethics committees, and those bills and their text are available on Congress.gov ^[4][5][6]. Until such measures are enacted and implemented, the clearest public records remain member biographies (Clerk/CRS), Senate historical pages for foreign‑born senators, and media/office statements ^[1][2][7].

5. Conflicting aims and political contexts that shape disclosure debates

Legislation framed as transparency — like the Dual Loyalty/Exclusive Citizenship proposals — also carries explicit political aims and rhetoric about “dual loyalty,” and its sponsors and opponents have partisan incentives that influence how disclosure requirements are promoted and criticized; reporting and bill summaries note that proponents aim to force explicit identification of other countries of citizenship while critics warn about singling out immigrant lawmakers ^[4][5][6].

6. Bottom line and the limits of current sources

In short, official public records reliably list foreign‑born members (House Clerk’s foreign‑born list, CRS profiles, Pew’s aggregate analysis) and are the best existing sources for identifying members with foreign birth or immigrant backgrounds, but the provided materials do not contain a complete, source‑verified list of which members have affirmatively filed or publicly declared current citizenship in another country — such specific citizenship disclosures would most likely appear in candidate statements, campaign filings, or ethics submissions if required by statute, but those filings are not compiled in a single public registry in the sources provided ^[1][2][3][4].