Are members of Congress required to renounce foreign citizenship to serve under the Constitution?
Executive summary
The Constitution does not explicitly require members of Congress to renounce foreign citizenship; current federal law allows dual citizenship and proposals to force renunciation are new and contested (see Moreno’s Exclusive Citizenship Act of 2025) [1] [2]. Legal precedent and current practice recognize that U.S. citizenship generally cannot be involuntarily revoked and that dual citizenship alone does not bar service in Congress [3] [1].
1. Constitutional silence, operational reality
The text of the Constitution sets only basic eligibility for Congress (age, residency, U.S. citizenship) and contains no clause that expressly demands renunciation of other nationalities for Representatives or Senators; available sources do not cite a constitutional provision requiring members of Congress to forswear foreign citizenship (available sources do not mention a constitutional renunciation requirement). Current law and practice permit dual nationals to serve, and news coverage notes that “current law allows for Americans to hold citizenship both at home and abroad” [1].
2. New legislation seeks to change the status quo
Sen. Bernie Moreno introduced the Exclusive Citizenship Act of 2025 to bar simultaneous foreign citizenship and require people to choose one nationality within a fixed period or be treated as having “voluntarily relinquished” U.S. citizenship [2] [4]. Press reporting summarizes the bill’s effect: it would force Americans — including public figures and potentially members of Congress — to renounce other citizenships or lose U.S. status, and would require administrative systems at State and DHS to implement it [5] [6].
3. Constitutional and judicial obstacles cited by observers
Multiple reports note the bill would face hard constitutional questions because longstanding Supreme Court precedent limits Congress’s power to strip citizenship without a voluntary act; Afroyim v. Rusk is cited as a key precedent protecting citizenship from involuntary revocation [7] [6]. Analysis in news reports and expert commentary warns the proposal “will almost certainly face constitutional challenges” and that implementing systems would be unprecedented and complex [5] [7].
4. Practical and political implications for lawmakers
News outlets point out that forcing renunciation would create logistical and political dilemmas: members of Congress who were born abroad or who maintain dual nationality could be compelled to choose, while disclosure proposals in the House would require candidates to reveal foreign citizenship or face disqualification [1] [8]. Coverage highlights real-world stakes — families, business ties and security-clearance questions — and notes political motives: the bills are framed as national-security and allegiance measures within a larger Republican focus on immigration and citizenship policy [9] [4].
5. What the federal code and practice actually say now
Current statutory framework and Department of State practice recognize acquisition of foreign citizenship can be an expatriating act only when taken with the specific intent to relinquish U.S. citizenship; the Congressional Research Service explains that voluntary acts committed with intent are the usual basis for loss of citizenship under section 349(a) and related law [3]. Reporting repeated that, under present law, dual citizenship does not automatically disqualify someone from receiving a security clearance or serving in public office absent other legal prohibitions [7] [1].
6. Competing viewpoints and likely outcomes
Supporters argue the Exclusive Citizenship Act would ensure “sole and exclusive allegiance” and close perceived conflicts of interest [4]. Opponents and legal scholars predict constitutional litigation and practical hurdles, pointing to Supreme Court decisions that protect citizenship absent voluntary relinquishment [7] [6]. Media coverage frames this as part of a broader political push on citizenship and immigration, increasing the chance the measure will be litigated rather than smoothly enacted [9] [5].
7. Bottom line for the question you asked
As of available reporting, members of Congress are not constitutionally required to renounce foreign citizenship; proposals like the Exclusive Citizenship Act would change statutory rules but face constitutional and administrative barriers and likely court challenges if enacted [1] [5] [7]. Available sources do not say that the Constitution currently imposes a renunciation requirement specifically on congressional service (available sources do not mention a constitutional renunciation requirement).