‘Good Moral Character?’ Holding Trump to the Same Standards as the Immigrants He Vilifies

From the moment Donald Trump descended his gilded escalator to launch his first presidential campaign in 2015, impugning immigrants as criminals has been the centerpiece of his political identity. “They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists,” he said that day.

This year, “migrant crime” has become a cornerstone of Trump’s campaign. Moments after he became a convicted felon himself in May, Trump took the opportunity not only to attack the justice system but to single out immigrants as criminals, stating that the country has “gone to hell” and blaming “millions and millions of people pouring into our country right now from prisons and from mental institutions, terrorists.”

Such invective flagrantly mischaracterizes the U.S. immigration process. Notwithstanding evidence that immigrants are generally more law-abiding than native-born Americans, the U.S. immigration system is preoccupied with barring criminal – or even suspected criminal – conduct. These bars are so strict that Trump himself, were he an immigrant and subject to the same scrutiny as those he now maligns, would be at high risk of being either refused entry, denied a green card, or rejected for citizenship.

Ironically, the U.S. political system sets lower standards for those who seek to lead the country than to join it. But an examination of Trump’s history through the prism of the U.S. immigration system is not just a hypothetical exercise. It demonstrates the stringency of the current system, the level of vetting to which immigrants are subject, and that Trump’s relentless equivalence of immigration with criminality is baseless.

The authors of this analysis volunteer as immigration legal counselors. Every day, we help refugees, asylees, and other immigrants answer the myriad questions asked by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) officers and by U.S. consular officials around the globe in application forms and interviews. (Note: This analysis represents the personal views of the authors, not those of any organizations we are affiliated with.)

The following tables list the questions we have identified where Trump, were he an immigrant himself, could potentially be vulnerable. Through evidence from the public record, much of it documented in the American Autocracy Threat Tracker published on Just Security, these charts illustrate the numerous and far-ranging ways that USCIS officials scrutinize applicants for potential threats to public safety and national security. These inquiries typically emerge at two key junctures:

When seeking to enter or obtain a green card

• Applicants for an immigrant visa or lawful permanent residence (green card) must demonstrate they are not “inadmissible” under U.S. laws or regulations barring those who may pose a risk to the health, national security, public safety, or foreign policy of the United States.
  

When seeking to naturalize

• Applicants seeking to naturalize as a U.S. citizen must demonstrate “good moral character” (“GMC”) and attachment to the U.S. Constitution and form of government.
• GMC is less subjective than it sounds. To ensure that new citizens measure up to the “standards of average citizens of the community,” a well-defined list of crimes has been developed. Serious crimes can bar applicants from GMC permanently; in addition to murder, these include gathering or transmitting classified information, money laundering, racketeering, or fraud over $10,000. Lesser crimes can bar applicants from GMC for three or five years, such as bank fraud, obstruction of justice, defrauding the government, certain kinds of sexual abuse, and even adultery if it leads to the breakup of a marriage.
• Attachment to the Constitution has been defined by regulation as including, among other things, “advocacy of peaceful change” and “demonstrating an acceptance of the democratic, representational process established by the Constitution.”

If Trump were an immigrant, he would be asked about these topics repeatedly. His 34 felony convictions would be just the tip of the iceberg. Any immigrant with his record of attempting to overturn the 2020 election, repeated endorsements of violence, civil findings of fraud and sexual abuse, attempts to undermine U.S. foreign policy, advocacy of sexual violence, history of alleged racial discrimination, and even his marital infidelity would run the risk of being denied immigration benefits.

To be clear, answering “yes” to any of these questions would not automatically lead to a denial. Immigration law is complex; we make no predictions on how a hypothetical USCIS adjudicator would rule. However, Trump’s answers would likely be a red flag triggering further investigation into his background and character.

In our analysis, we consider the same types of evidence that a USCIS adjudicator might consider. For example, immigrants must disclose all arrests or charges, including those resulting in acquittals. Immigration officers have access to law enforcement databases and other sources to ensure the veracity of applications. Visa applicants are even required to disclose social media handles to screen for terrorism or criminal risks. Court convictions are not always necessary; merely admitting to the elements of certain crimes can render an applicant inadmissible or preclude a finding of good moral character. For some crimes, including money laundering and drug trafficking, the U.S. government can deem an immigrant inadmissible with mere “reason to believe” the applicant has engaged in such conduct, a standard akin to probable cause. Some applications such as for visas and green cards are considered discretionary and require a favorable judgment by an officer on the “totality of the circumstances,” including any public safety or national security concerns. Furthermore, applicants like Trump with pending criminal charges, or those who are on probation, would not be allowed to become lawful permanent residents or to naturalize until those matters are fully resolved.

Of course, Trump and his supporters would argue that his prosecutions are political. USCIS recognizes that purely political offenses should not be held against applicants. Refugees, asylees, and others who have fled persecution have often been subject to criminal charges in their home countries based on their political beliefs. USCIS would have to evaluate such claims on their merits (if any).

In our years of assisting refugees, asylees, and others through the legal immigration process, we have never encountered an immigrant with anywhere close to Trump’s long record of indictments, arrests, convictions, criticisms of the United States’ constitutional order, and well-documented allegations of sexual misconduct and incitement to violence. Those we help are overwhelmingly law-abiding. Even those who have had brushes with the law must admit what they’ve done, knowing full well it could lead to delays or disqualification. We believe Trump should be held to the same high standards as the immigrants he constantly vilifies.

Application for Green Card (Form I-485, 04/21/2024 edition)

Application for Naturalization (N-400, 04/01/2024 edition)

IMAGE: U.S. Republican Presidential Candidate and former President Donald Trump speaks at the U.S.-Mexico border on August 22, 2024 south of Sierra Vista, Arizona. (Photo by Rebecca Noble/Getty Images)