Which members of Congress have publicly disclosed holding a second citizenship, and what countries did they list?
Executive summary
There is no official, public roster of sitting Members of Congress who have disclosed holding a second citizenship because federal law does not require Members to report foreign citizenship, and reporting mechanisms do not collect that information [1]. Where reporting exists, it is patchy: a few high‑profile senators have publicly stated they do not hold foreign citizenship, and several recent bills would force disclosure or ban dual citizens from serving — but those bills do not themselves identify current dual citizens [2] [3] [4].
1. No centralized disclosure: the structural gap that produces uncertainty
Current public record keeping and disclosure rules do not require Members of Congress to list foreign citizenship, and the Congressional Research Service and official biographies do not systematically report dual nationality, leaving no authoritative list of dual‑citizen officeholders [1] [5]. Multiple commentators and watchdogs have noted the absence of a public registry: Foreign Policy Journal explicitly states “there is nothing in the public record that discloses the foreign citizenship of House and Senate members,” a point repeated by others examining transparency gaps [1]. That structural vacuum is why much of the public debate rests on claims, estimates and legislative proposals rather than verified disclosures.
2. Public denials and known statements: what is on the record
A small number of prominent legislators have been asked about alleged foreign citizenship and have publicly denied holding it; for example, Senators Bernie Sanders and Chuck Schumer have both explicitly stated they do not hold Israeli citizenship when questioned, and reporting has cited those denials [2]. Beyond such denials, the sources supplied do not identify a roster of Members who have publicly affirmed holding a second nationality, which underscores that concrete, member‑by‑member admissions are rare in the public record [1].
3. Legislative momentum to force disclosures — names, bills and politics
Because of the disclosure gap, several members of Congress have introduced bills to require candidates or Members to reveal any non‑U.S. citizenship. Representative Thomas Massie led the “Dual Loyalty Disclosure Act” in 2023 and related proposals have been introduced in the 118th Congress; the text of H.R. 946 and H.R. 7484 would insert a requirement for candidates or Members to report foreign nationality status [4] [3]. Massie’s initiative drew conservative cosponsors such as Representatives Andy Biggs, Marjorie Taylor Greene and Clay Higgins and prompted media coverage that framed the bills as part of a broader push on “loyalty” and transparency [6] [7].
4. Estimates, claims and contested numbers — reading the signals
Because there is no compulsory disclosure, outside organizations and media have offered estimates and claims: a Newsweek account reported proponents citing unspecified estimates [7], and one outlet cited Forbes estimates that “up to 30 members” may hold dual citizenship with Israel noted as a frequently mentioned country [7]. Those figures are not corroborated by official filings in the supplied sources and should be treated as speculative rather than documentary evidence [1]. Snopes’ fact‑checks show how quickly unverified claims spread and how denials — for example by Senators Sanders and Schumer — have been necessary to counter rumors [2].
5. Motives, agendas and the limits of available evidence
The push for disclosure and for restrictions on dual citizenship is politically freighted: sponsors frame it as transparency and conflict‑of‑interest prevention, while critics warn it can fuel nativist and antisemitic narratives and may be redundant to existing ethics rules [8] [6]. Reporting in the supplied sources shows both policy rationales and political uses of the debate: bills like Massie’s aim to produce data that today’s public record lacks, but the legislative proposals themselves are contested and have not created a verified list of dual‑citizen Members [9] [3]. The absence of a comprehensive public disclosure means definitive answers about which Members have publicly admitted to holding a second citizenship cannot be produced from the supplied reporting; the best‑documented fact in the public record from these sources is that some prominent Senators have publicly denied foreign citizenship while no authoritative roster of affirmations exists [2] [1].