But what's more important than this particular change is how the new policy fits a trend. Just as the Trump administration has sought to limit both legal and illegal immigration generally, it has tried to make it harder to gain U.S. citizenship by serving in the military. That’s a sharp break from the past.

Military service was once a means to U.S. citizenship

AD

Serving in the military has long been a way to become a U.S. citizen. In 1942, for example, to boost World War II era recruitment, Congress exempted servicemembers from most naturalization requirements. Even today, U.S. law exempts those who serve during wartime from residency requirements, and reduces those requirements for those serving in peacetime.

AD

The Trump administration has made that harder through a series of small changes

AD

But the Trump administration has pursued a range of policies trying to slow that down.

AD

AD

Further, earlier this summer the administration announced it would stop blocking deportations for active-duty troops, their families, and veterans. Then came the latest policy in this series, withdrawing automatic citizenship for the children of some servicemembers.

To be sure, the Trump administration is not the first to deport veterans. In January, the Government Accountability Office revealed that between 2013 and 2018, United States Immigration and Custom Enforcement (ICE) did not offer additional review in veterans’ deportation proceedings, as policies required, and that some were improperly deported.

AD

But the Trump administration has intensified efforts to separate military service from citizenship. The Immigrant Legal Resource Center advised in 2018 that “it may now be faster for [lawful permanent residents] seeking citizenship to remain civilians.”

AD

These policy changes hurt military recruitment and effectiveness

Today’s military relies on immigrants both for numbers and for access to critical languages and skills. That’s why, after the September 11 attacks, President George W. Bush signed a 2002 Executive Order expediting naturalization for anyone serving in the military from then on, and in 2008 implemented MAVNI.

AD

AD

The changes also hurt civil rights efforts for immigrants

Second, historically, military service has been integral to expanding civil rights. British women used their service in World War I to win voting rights. In the U.S., political scientists Christopher Parker, Ronald Krebs, and G.L.A. and Evelyn Harris have shown that various marginalized communities have done likewise. In particular, Parker finds that African American veterans returning from World War II drew on the rhetorical weight of their military service to demand civil rights at home.

Krebs shows that opponents of civil rights have long recognized the power of this argument. For example, a Civil War era Congressman from Ohio argued against expanding black participation in the Union army, saying, “If you make [the black man] the instrument by which your battles are fought, the means by which your victories are won, you must treat him as a victor is entitled to be treated, with all decent and becoming respect.”

AD

AD

Thus, even if individual policy changes may affect a few servicemembers, the cumulative effect may be significant. Evidence suggests that it may reduce the military’s ability to accomplish its own goals — while also limiting a way that immigrants can claim a more permanent place in American society.

Rebecca Best (@RebeccaBestIR) is assistant professor of political science at University of Missouri at Kansas City.

Kyleanne Hunter (@rambaky) is a U.S. Marine Corps combat veteran, adjunct professor of security studies at Georgetown University and Vice President of Programs at Brady.