52 N. KAPOOR AND K. NARKOWICZ Citizenship as a disciplinary device The initial call for expanding the scope of deprivation powers in 2002 was framed within a broader integrationist narrative that re-connected immigration politics with domestic approaches to race-relations where the assertion was that the future of British security rested on promoting a new sense of British national identity based on shared values (Home Office 2002; Kundnani 2007). Citizenship deprivation was thus the most punitive end of broader revised approach to citizenship which was being re-constructed as something to be earned, proven through citizenship tests, language tests and oaths of allegiance to the Queen (Kapoor 2018). The target of this new form of “integrationism” (Kundnani 2007) was largely British Muslim communities who have continued to represent the archetypical Other in state constructions producing the ideal citizen. If citizenship has always been a privileged category (Bhambra 2015; Goldberg 2002), defined as much by who is excluded from it as who it includes, the advancement in state powers to deprive is indicative of the mobilization of citizenship as a disciplinary device. This shift in the way citizenship has been conceptualized has been aided significantly by the representation of the ultimate denizen in the form of the trope of the terrorism suspect. A signifier which symbolically starkly opposes that of the citizen through the criminalization that it conjures (Kapoor 2018), citizenship deprivation or suspension in some form follows as an appropriate material response. Over the course of the twenty-first century as the War on Terror has intensified, discourses aligning British Muslims with terrorism have saturated political and media representations with the effect of symbolically excluding from the nation those with legal citizen entitlements. Related escalation of counter-terrorism legislation has come to infiltrate the everyday policing practices administered in these communities. Constant subjection to measures of surveillance and control, whether that be through experiences of stop and search within communities or at airports (Blackwood, Hopkins, and Reicher 2013), through community surveillance programmes (Kalra and Mehmood 2013), or through interventions made by education, health or social welfare professionals sanctioned via the Government’s Preventing Violent Extremism (Prevent) programme (Choudhury and Fenwick 2011), have come to frame young British Muslims’ lived experiences of citizenship. It is against this context that our interviews took place and the ease with which narratives shifted between general forms of community policing which have been institutionalized through Prevent and the respondents’ own experiences of citizenship denial illuminated clear continuities between the formal exclusion enacted through suspending one’s identity papers and the more ambiguous forms of “internal exclusion” that deny legal citizens their full spectrum of social and political rights.