Van Hollen Joins Hirono, Colleagues, in Raising Alarms About Increased Naturalization Fees

Today, U.S. Senator Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) joined Senator Mazie K. Hirono (D-Hawaii), a senior member of the Senate Committee on the Judiciary who is a Naturalized Citizen, and 10 of their Democratic Senate colleagues in pressing the Trump Administration on their recent proposed rule to increase naturalization fees and remove reduced fee options and fee waivers for those attempting to become citizens. In a letter to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) Director Joseph B. Edlow, the senators raised alarms about how the proposed fee increases would limit citizenship for thousands of immigrants. “USCIS’s actions have repeatedly increased the burden of and difficulty in obtaining U.S. citizenship,” wrote the senators . “Naturalization is a critical pathway to immigrant integration, civic engagement, and democratic participation, yet your agency’s actions represent a significant departure from these values.” Under the Trump Administration’s proposed rule, immigrants seeking U.S. citizenship would face hundreds of dollars of fee increases, up to 80 percent more. Immigrants seeking a hearing on naturalization proceedings would also face an up to 83 percent fee increase. Additionally, the proposed rule eliminates preexisting reduced-fee options and fee waivers, designed to help immigrants achieve citizenship no matter their financial status. In their letter, the senators highlighted how the proposed rule burdens the pathway to citizenship without providing clear guidance about how access will be preserved for immigrants who are unable to meet the increased financial threshold. “While your agency asserts that the increased fees are necessary to recover the full cost of adjudicating naturalization applications and to support enhanced screening and vetting measures, it fails to address the increased fees’ deterrent effect on eligible applicants, particularly those from low-income communities,” the senators continued. Despite the Trump Administration’s consistent claims that it supports legal immigration, the senators highlighted how the naturalization fee increase will have the opposite effect. In addition to the proposed fees, UCSIS has also increased the difficulty of the civics test required to become citizens and eliminated the Citizenship Integration and Grant Program designed to help immigrants navigate the process. In their letter, the senators demanded prompt responses to explain the agency’s methodology when electing to increase naturalization fees, the anticipated impact of these fee increases on lawful permanent residents’ abilities to become naturalized citizens, and the changes in the naturalization process that necessitated the increased fees. The letter was also signed by Senators Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Ed Markey (D-Mass.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), and Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.). The full text of the letter is available here and below. Dear Director Edlow: We write regarding the proposed rule issued by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) on June 23, 2026. That proposed rule would substantially increase naturalization fees and eliminate the reduced-fee option and fee waivers. These changes will place U.S. citizenship out of reach for many low-income lawful permanent residents who are otherwise eligible to naturalize. Under the proposed rule, an applicant seeking U.S. citizenship would face fee increases of up to 80 percent and up to an 83 percent increase for a hearing on a decision in naturalization proceedings. The proposed rule would also eliminate both the reduced-fee option and the fee-waiver provision for non-military applicants. While your agency asserts that the increased fees are necessary to recover the full cost of adjudicating naturalization applications and to support enhanced screening and vetting measures, it fails to address the increased fees’ deterrent effect on eligible applicants, particularly those from low-income communities. The proposed rule does not demonstrate that USCIS considered applicants' reliance interests, evaluated reasonable alternatives that would preserve access to naturalization, or adequately justified why naturalization applicants should bear the costs of expanded adjudicatory processes. USCIS’s actions have repeatedly increased the burden of and difficulty in obtaining U.S. citizenship. In addition to these proposed fees, your agency increased the difficulty of the civics test that individuals must take to become citizens. You also eliminated the Citizenship and Integration Grant Program that helps immigrants navigate the process. Naturalization is a critical pathway to immigrant integration, civic engagement, and democratic participation, yet your agency’s actions represent a significant departure from these values. To fulfill our Congressional oversight responsibilities, we respectfully request that you provide written answers to the following questions by August 25 th : What analysis did your agency conduct regarding the impact of moving from an ability-to-pay framework to a strict beneficiary-pays model? Please include any analysis your agency conducted on the broader public benefits of naturalization, the equity implications, and how these factors were weighed in establishing the proposed fees. What analysis did your agency conduct regarding the anticipated impact of the proposed fee increases on low-income communities? Please include any estimates of how many otherwise eligible lawful permanent residents may be unable to apply for naturalization or may delay filing as a result of the fee increases. Please also provide any assessment of the impacts on legal service providers, community-based organizations, and other stakeholders assisting applicants with the naturalization process. What specific pre- and post-approval screening and vetting processes are needed by the agency for naturalization adjudications that necessitated the increased fees? Please also include the following: The authority requiring such processes, including whether the additional processing is required by a specific Executive Order, statute, or policy change within the agency; Whether and how these processes are authorized to be funded through Immigration Examinations Fee Account (IEFA) funds; The costs associated with each process; Whether those costs are directly attributable to individual naturalization adjudications; and What alternatives were considered by the agency before proposing the fee increases. What USCIS personnel responsible for naturalization adjudication and processing have been terminated, reassigned, or otherwise removed since January 2025? Of that number, how many positions have been refilled? Please also detail any reductions in USCIS funding or resources related to application processing, backlog reduction, or naturalization adjudications since January 2025. We should not price citizenship outside the reach of immigrants; instead, we should explore ways to encourage individuals to fulfill the American Dream. If you have any questions, please reach out to my staff.