Megyn Kelly reports: Ilhan Omar claimed when she obtained her citizenship when her father was naturalized in (2000).
This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.
Executive summary
Megyn Kelly’s framing — that Rep. Ilhan Omar “claimed” she obtained U.S. citizenship when her father naturalized in 2000 — cannot be conclusively verified from the available reporting because Omar’s naturalization records are not publicly accessible and Minnesota does not require those documents for federal candidates [1]. Publicly reported dates and documents create a credible tension: Omar’s widely reported birth year of 1982 makes her 17–18 in 2000, and critics argue that timing would undermine a claim of automatic derivative citizenship through a parent under the relevant statute [2] [1].
1. The factual scaffolding: arrival, birth year, and the 2000 naturalization claim
Ilhan Omar is consistently reported as having been born in October 1982 and to have arrived in the United States with her family as a refugee in 1995, facts repeated in public profiles [2] [1]. The disputed chronology that fuels Kelly’s reporting rests on the assertion — advanced by some critics and public posts — that Omar’s father could not have naturalized until roughly 2000 because refugees face a five‑year residency before naturalization, placing any parental naturalization around the turn of the millennium [1]. If the father indeed naturalized in or around 2000, that timing becomes legally significant because derivative citizenship rules hinge on whether the child was under 18 at the moment of a parent’s naturalization [1].
2. The legal hinge: derivative citizenship under INA §322 and the age question
Advocates of the claim point to immigration law mechanics — notably rules that can confer citizenship automatically on children when a parent naturalizes while the child is a minor — and say those rules make the father’s naturalization date decisive [1]. Reporting highlighting this point argues that because Omar was born in 1982 she would have been an adult or nearly so by 2000, which would mean she could not derive citizenship as a minor from a 2000 parental naturalization [1] [2]. That line of argument is the core of Megyn Kelly’s implication that Omar’s own account about timing is inconsistent with the derivative‑citizenship pathway described by critics [1].
3. Conflicting traces in the public record: date fixes, staff edits, and later claims
The public record shows contradictory signals rather than a clean refutation: media reporting and unaffiliated blogs have alleged attempts to correct or change Omar’s reported birth date in library records, and investigative pieces have seized on email trails and edits to suggest an effort to reconcile dates [3]. Separately, some later summaries and summaries of public records claim Omar’s naturalization occurred in the mid‑2000s, which would place her own naturalization well before her 2018 election and avoid the derivative‑citizenship question entirely [4]. These strands point to either clerical confusion or substantive uncertainty in secondary reporting, not to an authoritative public document resolving the question.
4. The key limitation: no publicly verified naturalization record
Critically, the factual claim cannot be settled on available reporting because no authenticated naturalization certificate has been publicly produced and the Minnesota Secretary of State does not require candidates to file foreign naturalization records, leaving citizenship documentation inaccessible to typical public checks [1]. That lack of primary documentation is the reason conservative probes insist the question remains “unknown and inaccessible,” and it is also why alternate accounts that cite a mid‑2000s naturalization (or an on‑file certificate) remain difficult to independently substantiate from the material provided here [1] [4].
5. Bottom line: Kelly’s assertion is plausible as a line of attack but not definitively proven
Megyn Kelly’s point — that Omar’s claim of having obtained citizenship via her father’s 2000 naturalization would be inconsistent with available birth and arrival dates — tracks a real chronological tension in secondary reporting [1] [2]. However, because no verified naturalization records are publicly available and some later accounts assert a mid‑2000s naturalization for Omar herself, the claim cannot be proven or disproven on the basis of the sources presented here; the strongest factual statement supported by the reporting is that the chronology raises legitimate questions and that the underlying primary documents remain undisclosed [1] [4].