No. 67 of 108
August 19, 2025
“U.S. citizenship reviews will sharpen focus on ‘moral character’, memo say”. The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services will apply a “more rigorous, holistic and comprehensive basis”. “Good moral character” is defined by an individual’s “behavior, adherence to societal norms, and positive contributions”, which will be judged on a case-to-case basis. Critics warned this will become a highly subjective test, intended to make it more difficult to become a U.S. citizen. Good moral character has been part of the evaluation since the 1970s. The difference in this rule is the requirement to prove positive attributes rather than absence of misconduct.
Most citizens of a country who do not have to pass a test to become one -- mostly because you were born here and perhaps the descendant’s descendant’s descendant of someone who did pass a test – would have difficulty in passing the parts of the exam about American history and government. Article such and such of the Constitution? Perhaps, m-a-y-b-e, you fleetingly read about it in high school. Remembering it a decade or two later? Not so much. Interesting to think about the values imposed in proving up to be a citizen, and what it may look like to re-up. The ‘what’ of it, and the purpose of it. What if there was a continuing education requirement, just as there are for doctors to practice medicine or teachers to continue teaching? And when it comes to good moral character, how about telling the truth (vs a truth), or doing what it is you said you would do, or not cheating, or owning up when you’ve made a mistake whether intentional or not, or caring about other people (and beings, for the holistic), picking up after your own rubbish, sharing, and speaking up when you see something that isn’t right? What about doing and being the attributes we wish for ourselves and each other, without an exam?