Approximately 750,000 naturalization applications were pending as of June 2018. The growing processing backlog makes it more difficult for citizens-in-waiting to become civically engaged, preventing a large pool of potential voters from participating in local and national elections. Despite the backlog, many USCIS officers who conduct citizenship interviews have been relocated to the U.S.-Mexico border to conduct asylum interviews as the government seeks to expedite those cases.311 In February 2019, 86 members of Congress sent a letter to USCIS regarding the “alarming growth in processing delays” for naturalization. The letter also expressed alarm over the request to transfer IEFA funds to ICE for denaturalization purposes, stating that “[t]his appears to represent part of USCIS’s larger shift toward prioritizing immigration enforcement over the service-oriented adjudications at the core of the agency’s mandate.”312 The funding that USCIS receives from IEFA is not subject to annual congressional approval, meaning USCIS is not wholly dependent on Congress for funding. Since Congress does not have oversight over IEFA, it does not have a say over: [W]hether some fees are at levels that inhibit some potential applicants from applying for benefits or inhibit lawful permanent residents from becoming citizens; whether the pace and progress of information technology modernization is sufficient to meet the agency’s multiple functions and efficiently serve petitioners; and whether USCIS’s management of its personnel and resources adequately addresses sudden demands for processing and adjudication of petitions while maintaining processing times and adequate levels of service for all other petitions.313 In addition to slowing the naturalization process and thus limiting the number of new citizens, the Trump administration has also proposed plans to increase eligibility requirements for naturalization. For instance, one proposal would demand additional documentation—such as children’s birth certificates or supplementary information to ascertain one’s “good moral character”—which are not currently required, and which some individuals (particularly refugees and asylees) may not have or be able to get.”314 Furthermore, USCIS has proposed changing the fee waiver rule for the filing fee required for naturalization, making it more difficult for low-income individuals to prove eligibility for a waiver. According to the non-profit group Asian Americans Advancing Justice (AAAJ), this would affect almost 245,000 applicants who apply for the fee waiver each year and will discourage those without means from applying for citizenship.315 Appropriations and discretionary spending decisions by the Trump administration to support denaturalizations reflect the systematic prioritization of citizenship-stripping, at the expense II. Denaturalization: A Radical Measure in the Hands of Zealots 73