Two federal probes against Ilhan Omar: denaturalization is a separate civil process, says former judge Hansen

A former federal immigration judge says US Representative Ilhan Omar, who is under investigation, could face both criminal charges and denaturalization. Two federal probes are ongoing into the Minnesota Democrat congresswoman.

The first probe concerns alleged immigration fraud and the second involves her financial disclosures, where a sharp discrepancy was reported just one year apart.

Nathan Hansen, an attorney of 23 years, told Fox News Digital that if a naturalized citizen is convicted of a crime, that does not automatically mean they face denaturalization. They would face whatever normal punishment comes from the court.

Hansen was appointed by former Attorney General Pam Bondi to serve as an immigration judge earlier this year. He served in the role for four months.

Hansen said a denaturalization proceeding to strip someone of their naturalization is another proceeding, separate from any criminal case — a civil proceeding brought by the Department of Justice, presumably on behalf of the Department of Homeland Security, which handles most of these matters.

In his view, if there was some sort of nexus between a criminal conviction and somebody's citizenship, it might be more likely that the Department of Justice would bring a denaturalization proceeding, but it would be a discretionary matter for those running the department.

Omar is under investigation for alleged immigration fraud related to the way she or her late father filled out her citizenship paperwork. According to sources familiar with the investigation, her 'real name' is Ilhan Nur Said Elmi.

Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) raided Omar's Washington, DC home in the early morning hours of October 12. During the raid investigators reportedly seized her phone, passport and computer. Fox News later confirmed that authorities are in possession of her DNA.

On claims that statutes of limitations could hinder a prosecution, Hansen said his view is that fraud generally stops any statute of limitations — if something is not disclosed or is hidden, it would be unfair to apply a limitation period against the other party, which he described as a general principle of law.

Asked about the prevalence of immigration fraud, Hansen pointed to the sheer number of pending immigration and removal cases across the country and in Minnesota. He said that in Minnesota alone there are 20,000 to 30,000 removal cases pending that do not have a scheduled court date, due to a massive backlog.

Hansen said bogus asylum claims are also contributing to the backlog. Asylum relief rests on protected grounds such as persecution based on race, religion, ethnicity or political views. While serving as a judge, he said, he frequently saw claims that 'just totally didn't add up' or documents provided by applicants that were 'clearly fake'.