South Carolina Republican Representative Nancy Mace has introduced a resolution seeking a constitutional amendment to bar naturalized citizens from federal office. The proposal, which targets roles in Congress and federal judgeships, has drawn sharp criticism from several foreign-born Democratic lawmakers.

The 32 foreign-born lawmakers currently serving in Washington

The current composition of the U.S. Congress includes 32 members who were born outside the United States . As the report indicates, this group consists of 26 members in the House of Representatives—comprising 19 Democrats and seven Republicans—and six members of the Senate, including four Democrats and two Republicans.

This demographic reality highlights the scale of the potential impact if Mace's resolution were to succeed. The proposal would fundamentally alter the makeup of the legislative and judicial branches by disqualifying a significant portion of the current membership based on their citizenship status.

Nancy Mace's argument regarding "one loyalty"

Representative Nancy Mace's proposal rests on the premise of singular national allegiance. In a post on X on Wednesday, Mace argued that those writing America's laws and confirming its judges should possess only one loyalty: America, rather than any other country.

Mace specifically identified Democratic Representatives Ilhan Omar, Shri Thanedar, and Pramila Jayapal as individuals who were not citizens by birth. According to the source, Mace claimed that these sitting members of Congress make it clear every day that their loyalty is not to the United States.

The "xenophobic" and "immoral" rebuttal from Jayapal and Krishnamoorthi

Democratic lawmakers born outside the United States have responded to the resolution with sharp condemnation. Pramila Jayapal, a Washington State Democrat born in Chennai, India, labeled the proposal "xenophobic" and noted that her naturalization ceremony was one of the most significant moments of her life.

Illinois Democrat Raja Krishnamoorthi, who was born in New Delhi, India, also used social media to denounce the move, calling Mace's plan "immoral" and "un-American." Meanwhile, Michigan Democrat Shri Thanedar, born in Chikkodi, India, responded with a satirical post on X regarding the resolution's implications for congressional staff.

The ambiguity of Mace's "Senate-confirmed offices" target

The scope of Mace's legislative target remains partially undefined in the current resolution. While the proposal explicitly mentions Congress and federal judgeships, it also refers to "other Senate-confirmed offices in the federal government" without specifying which ones.

Several questions remain regarding the specifics of the amendment. It is currently unclear which exact federal positoins Mace intends to include in the ban, and the source does not clarify if other members of the House or Senate have issued formal responses to the filing. Furthermore, the report does not indicate if the resolution has received support from any other Republican leadership.

The steep two-thirds and three-fourths path to ratification

Passing a constitutional amendment requires an extremely high threshold of support that makes Mace's proposal an uphill battle. To move forward, the resolution would first need to be approved by a two-thirds majority vote in both the House and the Senate.

Even after achieving congressional approval, the amendment would face a final, rigorous hurdle. It would require ratification by three-fourths of the states to be officially added to the U.S. Constitution, a process that historically requires broad, bipartisan consensus.