When a person applies for U.S. citizenship through naturalization, USCIS must determine whether they have demonstrated Good Moral Character (GMC) during the period required by law. In most cases, USCIS primarily examines the 5 years before the naturalization application is filed. For certain applicants applying under the rules for spouses of U.S. citizens, the period is generally 3 years.
However, it is important to understand that serious crimes are not the only issues that can affect the good moral character assessment. USCIS may consider other conduct during the statutory period, even when it does not create an automatic bar to citizenship.
1. DUI and Good Moral Character Under Current Rules
Currently, a single conviction for driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs (DUI) does not automatically mean that a person cannot naturalize. However, USCIS policy provides that two or more DUI convictions during the statutory period create a rebuttable presumption that the applicant lacks good moral character.
A rebuttable presumption does not mean an automatic bar. It means that the applicant must present substantial, relevant, and credible evidence to show that, despite the convictions, they had good moral character during the applicable period and that the incidents were a departure from their usual conduct.
Simply demonstrating rehabilitation after the convictions will not necessarily be enough to establish good moral character during the period in which the DUIs occurred.
A new proposal in Congress could create much more severe consequences for certain DUI cases
On January 7, 2026, a bill was introduced in the Senate: S. 3584, titled “Stop Illegal Aliens Drunk Driving.”
IMPORTANT: This proposal is not yet law. Until it is passed by Congress and enacted, people should not assume that its provisions are already part of immigration law. However, the proposal deserves attention because it would significantly change the immigration consequences of certain serious offenses involving driving under the influence.
What does S. 3584 propose?
S. 3584 proposes amending the definition of “aggravated felony” under the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). The proposal would add certain offenses to that definition involving driving:
- While intoxicated;
- Under the influence of alcohol;
- Under the influence of a controlled substance; or
- Under the influence of another illegal narcotic or intoxicating substance.
But there is a very important distinction:
The proposal does NOT provide that every DUI would automatically constitute an aggravated felony.
To fall within the proposed new definition, the offense would have to have resulted in:
- The death of another person; or
- Serious bodily injury to another person.
In addition, the text provides that this classification could apply regardless of whether the offense was classified as a misdemeanor or a felony under federal, state, tribal, or local law.
Why would classification as an “Aggravated Felony” be so important?
In immigration law, the term “aggravated felony” carries extremely serious consequences. This classification does not simply depend on how a state classifies the offense. An offense can carry immigration consequences that are far more serious than its apparent consequences under state criminal law.
If S. 3584 becomes law, a DUI resulting in death or serious bodily injury could go beyond being an issue in the discretionary assessment of good moral character and become a much more serious matter under the INA’s aggravated felony provisions. This could have consequences extending well beyond a citizenship application, including consequences involving deportability, inadmissibility, and eligibility for certain immigration benefits.
The proposal would also create a new ground of inadmissibility
S. 3584 also proposes amending INA §212(a)(2) to create a ground of inadmissibility related to these offenses. Under the proposed text, a person could be considered inadmissible if they have been convicted of, admit committing, or admit acts constituting the essential elements of a violation of state, federal, or foreign law involving the type of driving offense described in the proposal. This provision would be especially important for people applying for certain immigration benefits, visas, admission to the United States, or adjustment of status.
The proposal contains a particularly important provision concerning past cases
Another important aspect of S. 3584 is its provision concerning how the new law would apply. The bill provides that, if enacted, its amendments would take effect on the date of enactment. However, certain actions taken after that date could be subject to the new provisions regardless of when the underlying criminal conviction occurred. Therefore, a person with an old conviction potentially affected by this definition should not assume that the matter would be irrelevant simply because it happened many years earlier.
2. Failure to Meet Child or Dependent Support Obligations
USCIS may also consider whether a person willfully failed to provide financial support for their children or other dependents. This can become an issue even when there is no formal court order for child support. USCIS may view negatively situations in which a person:
- Stopped providing financial support for a minor child;
- Failed to provide support;
- Paid an amount that was clearly insufficient; or
- Failed to comply with a court-ordered support obligation and accumulated overdue payments.
When payments are overdue, USCIS may review court orders, payment history, and the circumstances that led to the failure to pay.
Extenuating circumstances may apply
Not every failure to meet a support obligation automatically means that a person lacks good moral character. USCIS may consider circumstances such as:
- Unemployment;
- Financial inability to pay;
- The reasons behind the financial difficulties;
- Good-faith efforts to provide financial support for the child;
- An honest, though mistaken, belief that the obligation had ended; or
- An error in calculating the amount owed.
For this reason, a person with a history of child support issues should be prepared to explain the circumstances and provide documentation.
3. Adultery During the Statutory Period
USCIS also identifies certain extramarital affairs as conduct that may affect good moral character. Specifically, an issue may arise when a person had an extramarital affair during the statutory period that tended to destroy an existing marriage.
This also does not mean that every extramarital affair automatically results in a denial. USCIS may consider extenuating circumstances, including situations in which:
- The person had obtained a divorce, but it was later determined that the divorce was not legally valid; or
- The spouses had already separated by mutual agreement but had been unable to obtain a formal divorce.
The specific circumstances matter.
What does all of this mean for someone who wants to apply for citizenship?
One of the most common mistakes is thinking:
“I don’t have a felony conviction, so I won’t have any problems applying for citizenship.”
The immigration analysis is much more complicated. USCIS may examine the applicant’s conduct during the statutory period, including issues involving DUIs, support for dependents, and certain personal conduct. In addition, Congress can change the immigration consequences of certain offenses.
S, 3584 illustrates exactly why a person with a criminal history should exercise particular caution before applying for citizenship or any other immigration benefit.
An old conviction should also be reviewed
A person should not assume that a conviction is no longer relevant simply because it occurred 10, 15, or 20 years ago. This is especially important when there is a history involving:
- DUI;
- Alcohol- or drug-related accidents;
- Injuries to another person;
- The death of another person;
- Multiple arrests or convictions; or
- Other criminal history.
The analysis should include not only the date of the conviction, but also the exact criminal statute, court records, the sentence, and the relevant legal circumstances.
Before filing Form N-400: review your complete history
If a person has:
- Two or more DUIs;
- A DUI involving serious injuries or the death of another person;
- Overdue child support or other support payments;
- Periods in which they did not financially support their children;
- An extramarital affair that affected an existing marriage; or
- Any other criminal history or conduct that could raise questions about their good moral character,
it is advisable to obtain a comprehensive immigration assessment before filing the naturalization application.
People should not assume there will be no immigration consequences simply because an offense occurred many years ago, was classified as a misdemeanor, they completed probation, or the criminal case is already closed.
IMPORTANT: S. 3584 IS STILL A PROPOSAL
As of this article’s publication, S. 3584 is not law. The bill was introduced in the Senate on January 7, 2026, and referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee. Therefore, the proposed provisions concerning aggravated felonies and inadmissibility should not be treated as though they are currently part of immigration law.
However, people with a history of DUI should stay informed about possible legislative changes, especially when the incident caused serious bodily injury or the death of another person.
Each case must be evaluated individually. An arrest, a DUI, or another prior incident does not necessarily mean that a person cannot obtain U.S. citizenship.
Contact Us
Law Office of Erika Rodriguez
📞 619-289-8090
If you have questions about your immigration case or believe these changes may affect your application, contact our office to schedule a consultation and learn about your available legal options.
Follow us for reliable immigration updates.
This article provides general information about immigration laws and legislative proposals. It does not constitute legal advice. Legislative proposals may be amended, rejected, or approved before becoming law. Immigration outcomes depend on the facts, the specific criminal provision, the immigration history, and the individual circumstances of each case.
