Fresh attention has turned to longstanding allegations against Ilhan Omar, the Minnesota congresswoman and Somalia-born US representative, after online commentators revived claims that she engaged in marriage and immigration fraud more than a decade ago. The accusations, which first surfaced in 2016, centre on her 2009 marriage to Ahmed Nur Said Elmi, whom critics allege is her brother. Although no conclusive evidence has ever emerged, the claims regained momentum following recent remarks by former US President Donald Trump, who referenced Omar while criticising the broader immigration system during a public appearance last week.
Trump suggested that Omar entered the country unlawfully by marrying her sibling, framing the allegation within his renewed emphasis on strict immigration enforcement. His comments came days after an Afghan national allegedly shot two National Guard soldiers near the White House, an incident that reignited political debate on national security and citizenship vetting. Soon after, social media accounts associated with the MAGA movement began circulating photos of Omar’s marriage records, urging the Department of Homeland Security to launch immediate action against her.
The controversy resurfaced alongside reminders of Omar’s past criticisms of India’s policies in Kashmir. Her 2022 visit to Pakistan-Occupied Kashmir had drawn condemnation from New Delhi after she met local leaders and raised concerns regarding human rights. While unrelated to the current allegations, her foreign policy positions have historically made her a target of ideological opponents who view her as contentious in US political discourse.
As debate intensified, users on platforms such as X shared what they claimed to be evidence of wrongdoing, with some urging that she be denaturalised and deported. Viral posts echoed the assertion that her marriage constituted fraud and that it facilitated immigration benefits for her former spouse. Many of these posts gained substantial engagement, often quoting statements suggesting that violations of the citizenship oath should lead to removal from the country.
The allegations have a long and complicated history. They originated in an anonymous online forum in 2016 and were amplified during Omar’s successful 2018 congressional run. Subsequent reporting highlighted inconsistencies in her marital timeline but did not produce proof of a familial relationship between Omar and Elmi or confirm fraud. Federal authorities examined the claims as well. The FBI reviewed related tips between 2019 and 2020, and the House Ethics Committee evaluated similar complaints in 2020. Both inquiries concluded without any charges or formal findings of misconduct.
Omar has repeatedly dismissed the claims as false, characterising them as politically motivated attacks rooted in prejudice. She has stated over the years that the allegations are part of broader efforts to discredit immigrants, Muslims and progressive lawmakers.
The discussion now centres on whether a naturalised US citizen, particularly an elected representative, could legally face deportation if fraud were proven. Under US law, citizenship may be revoked through denaturalisation if the government demonstrates that it was obtained through wilful misrepresentation or the concealment of a material fact. Such proceedings are civil and handled in federal court, where the Department of Justice must provide clear, unequivocal and convincing evidence. If citizenship is successfully revoked, the individual reverts to non-citizen status and may then be placed in removal proceedings.
Legal experts note that denaturalisation cases involving marriage fraud typically rely on strong contemporary evidence rather than allegations resurfacing many years later. In recent decades, federal denaturalisation actions have largely focused on individuals linked to human rights abuses or terrorism. In contrast, the claims against Omar remain unproven and heavily contested.
Despite growing calls from partisan online communities, any move to revoke Omar’s citizenship would require substantial and verifiable evidence demonstrating deliberate fraud during the naturalisation process. Without such proof, legal action remains unlikely, and the political debate surrounding her case is expected to continue as public discussions on immigration intensify.
