Can a U.S. president legally hold dual citizenship while in office?
Executive summary
Constitutional text does not bar a U.S. president from holding citizenship in another country; Article II requires a “natural-born” U.S. citizen but says nothing about dual nationality, and legal commentary and cases have treated dual citizenship as not disqualifying presidential eligibility [1] [2]. Recent politics and legislation, including President Trump’s 2025 executive actions and Senator Bernie Moreno’s Exclusive Citizenship Act of 2025 proposal, show political pressure to limit dual nationality but those measures are contested and not settled law [3] [4].
1. Constitutional silence: eligibility depends on “natural-born,” not exclusivity
The Constitution conditions the presidency on being a “natural-born” citizen, at least 35 years old, and a resident; it does not include language forbidding dual citizenship. Legal commentators and public Q&A have concluded that the Constitution’s requirements do not expressly prevent a president from simultaneously holding another nationality [1] [2]. That consensus underpins examples and debates showing eligibility is about the source of U.S. citizenship, not the existence of a second passport [1].
2. Historical and scholarly practice: courts and scholars focus on natural-born status
Scholars and practice have long focused on whether a candidate is a natural-born citizen rather than whether they possess more than one citizenship. Historical inquiries into presidential eligibility (e.g., debates about early presidents or candidates born abroad) treat dual nationality as a factual feature but not a constitutional disqualifier in the available reporting [2] [1]. Available sources do not claim any Supreme Court decision that holds dual citizenship alone disqualifies a president [2] [1].
3. Contemporary politics: executive action and proposed legislation seek to change the landscape
Since 2025, the White House has pursued policies framed as “protecting the meaning and value of American citizenship,” including Executive Order 14160; those actions have been used to argue for narrower interpretations of birthright and related citizenship rules and have prompted USCIS implementation planning [3] [5]. Separately, Senator Bernie Moreno introduced the Exclusive Citizenship Act of 2025, which would bar simultaneous U.S. and foreign citizenship and could force renunciations under penalty of losing U.S. nationality—an effort that, if enacted, would directly change the legal status of dual citizens, including potentially those in the president’s orbit [4] [6].
4. Legal friction: statutory change versus constitutional limits
A Congress-passed statute could seek to eliminate dual citizenship or create a process that presumes relinquishment; advocates of the Exclusive Citizenship Act assert it would remove current protections against involuntary loss of U.S. citizenship [4]. Yet constitutional protections and Supreme Court precedents on citizenship loss and voluntariness are implicated; the Forbes analysis cited warns that the bill “flouts” constitutional protections by presuming relinquishment from mere inaction [4]. Available sources do not report a final judicial resolution making such a statute definitively constitutional or describing the exact effect on presidential eligibility [4] [5].
5. Political stakes and practical implications
The political impact is immediate: reporting emphasizes that proposals would affect high-profile figures (e.g., First Lady Melania Trump, Elon Musk, others) and could force millions to choose nationalities within a year under some proposals, creating political and legal backlash [6] [7]. News outlets and legal commentators frame these initiatives as far-reaching—touching immigration, tax consequences, and the White House itself—while court challenges and administrative appeals are already part of the picture [8] [9] [5].
6. Competing viewpoints and limits of available reporting
Sources present competing views: some commentators and mobility analysts argue dual citizenship is widespread and legally unproblematic in practice [10], while policymakers and some legislators argue dual nationality undermines exclusive allegiance and should be ended [4] [6]. The reporting supplied does not include a definitive Supreme Court ruling that dual citizenship categorically prevents someone from serving as president, nor does it show enacted federal law that currently strips dual citizens of U.S. citizenship solely for holding another passport [2] [4] [5].
7. Bottom line for readers
Under existing constitutional interpretation reflected in available reporting, a person can be a U.S. president while holding another citizenship because the Constitution requires natural-born status but does not bar dual nationality; however, politically driven executive orders and pending legislation in 2025 seek to change statutory and administrative treatment of dual citizenship and are subject to legal challenge, meaning the status quo could shift if Congress acts or courts uphold new rules [1] [3] [4].
Limitations: This article relies solely on the provided reporting and legal commentary; it does not attempt to synthesize case law beyond what those sources summarize, and available sources do not supply a final court decision resolving whether new statutory schemes would be constitutional or how they would affect a sitting president [4] [5].