The path to becoming an American is getting tougher. A revamped civics exam is now in effect which tests applicants on deeper, more contextual knowledge of US history and government.The latest exam could become a major obstacle for many people worldwide, particularly for distant or disadvantaged groups, in clearing it. Whether this is another step by the US President to tighten his crackdown on immigrants or a reinforcement of existing MAGA-era rules affecting certain “aliens,” remains to be seen.
‘A bit more challenging’
USCIS spokesperson Matthew Tragesser said the goal is to ensure that everyone entering American soil must meet the strict eligibility criteria. “Only those aliens who meet all eligibility requirements, including the ability to read, write, and speak English and understand U.S. government and civics, are able to naturalize, the American people can be assured that those joining us as fellow citizens are fully assimilated and will contribute to America’s greatness,” said Tragesser in September, according to The Time.USCIS director Joseph Edlow, who was appointed by Trump, argued that the previous test was a little too easy and that a need for a fresh, reformed exam was necessary.“We need to make it a little bit more challenging. We’ve got to make sure that people are actually understanding what it means to be a U.S. citizen, what it means to get that benefit.”
A ‘useless’ test?
Critics warn that the changes could make the exam less about knowledge and more about subjective judgement. Stephen Mihm, a history professor at the University of Georgia, wrote in Bloomberg that the test would remain “useless” as a measure of civic understanding. Rights groups say it could disproportionately affect applicants with limited literacy, low incomes, or older applicants.“They create inequities in the testing process, making it harder for certain populations to succeed, which undermines the principle of fairness in the naturalization process,” organisations wrote a letter to Edlow.Edlow defended the approach, saying, “I don’t want this test to be so hard that it’s impossible, but I want it to be thought-provoking questions. A question of simply, ‘Hey, name two federal holidays’ and ‘name one branch of government’ or ‘name your governor’—it’s simply not enough. We need to know more.”
History of citizenship exams
The US naturalisation exam has evolved over more than a century. In the early 1800s, judges could quiz applicants on civics and history without standardised guidelines. By the early 1900s, literacy tests were considered as a method to ensure migrants could assimilate, but they were not implemented until 1917.The Bureau of Immigration and Naturalization, formed in 1906, eventually standardised the process. By the 1930s, the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) required a uniform procedure to assess applicants’ knowledge of civics and the Constitution. The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 codified the requirement for basic civic knowledge.Modern standardisation began in the 1980s with a set of 100 civics questions. A new, more challenging test was introduced in 2008, requiring six correct answers from ten and proof of English reading, writing, and speaking skills. The Trump Administration’s 2020 version added complex historical questions and increased the number of questions, but it was rolled back by the Biden Administration in 2021.
2025 test: The final hurdle?
The current 2025 civics test retains elements of the 2020 version. Officers ask questions until the applicant passes or fails, with nine incorrect answers resulting in failure. The new test focuses on history and explanation-based questions rather than simple facts or geography. Applicants may be asked about figures such as Dwight Eisenhower, Alexander Hamilton, and James Madison, or events such as the Persian Gulf and Vietnam wars.Applicants who filed before October 20 will still take the 2008 version. Those aged 65 or older with 20 years of residency will take a 10-question test from a bank of 20 questions from either version.Edlow has suggested future changes, such as essay questions designed to show applicants’ understanding of the Constitution. He told Axios, “I want adjudicators to really be listening and talking throughout the interview. Switch up some of the wording and see if the individuals are still able to comprehend the questions. That’s a better gauge of readiness.”There are also proposals to administer the test entirely in English and to evaluate applicants’ English proficiency beyond reading and writing.
