President Donald Trump’s push to remove Rep. Ilhan Omar from Congress could ignite a major constitutional fight as federal investigators examine allegations involving her immigration paperwork and U.S. citizenship. Omar has denied wrongdoing, and authorities have not established that she lacks citizenship.

Investigators are examining whether the Minnesota Democrat improperly obtained citizenship through allegedly fraudulent immigration documents involving her late father, Nur Omar Mohamed. The scrutiny raises questions about whether Congress could refuse to seat Omar or expel her after she takes office.

The dispute could test the limits of a landmark Supreme Court decision involving former House chairman Adam Clayton Powell Jr., a New York Democrat. Legal experts told Fox News Digital that Powell’s case might not prevent Congress from enforcing the Constitution’s citizenship requirements.

Powell faced allegations that he misused congressional funds and improperly paid his wife through the congressional payroll. Although voters reelected him, the House excluded him in 1967, prompting a Supreme Court ruling that Congress could not refuse to seat an elected member who met the Constitution’s qualifications.

Gun Laws Have Changed! Protect yourself by knowing where you can and cannot carry your firearm, so you can travel with confidence.

Former Deputy Assistant Attorney General John Yoo said that ruling prevents Congress from creating additional qualifications, but does not stop lawmakers from enforcing those already written into the Constitution. Citizenship is one of those requirements.

“Powell essentially means that Congress cannot add on to the minimum qualifications set out in the Constitution,” Yoo said. “[S]ince citizenship is set out in the text of the Constitution as a qualification, it clearly can be enforced by Congress. Powell in fact would support a congressional decision to oust Congresswoman Omar if she was in fact not a citizen.”

Constitutional scholar Cully Stimson also distinguished Powell’s exclusion from a formal expulsion. “The Powell v. McCormack decision did not involve expulsion. It actually was to judge qualifications. That's a subtle but important difference,” he said.

Stimson described a possible January confrontation if federal authorities presented evidence questioning Omar’s citizenship before the new Congress convened. House Republicans could attempt to keep her from being seated, while Omar could challenge that decision in court.

The Constitution requires House members to be at least 25 years old, to have held U.S. citizenship for seven years, and to live in the states they represent when elected. Stimson said the decisive question would be whether Omar legally acquired citizenship, even if alleged immigration irregularities originated with her father.

“It's like you're either pregnant or you're not,” Stimson said. “You’re either wet or dry — You're a citizen, or you are not a citizen.”

Trump has repeatedly called for Omar’s resignation or expulsion, citing reports that she used a pseudonym when she was sworn into office and that she “married her brother.” Speaking Monday in Alcorn County, Mississippi, Trump said, “Let’s get her the Hell out of there.”

BREAKING: President Trump is HELLBENT on having Speaker Johnson disqualify Somali Rep. Ilhan from Congress

"Because she used a fake name to be sworn in, I assume that we must immediately resign her from Congress. Let's get her the hell out of there!" "Hear ye hear ye, please inform the Speaker of the House of Representatives, James Michael Johnson, that the Democrat Party has just conceded the former Ilhan Omar's seat and that Ilhan Nur Said Elmi, her real name, has openly admitted to fraud and that she will no longer be legally allowed to be a member of that august body." MAKE IT HAPPEN. She's done. Just remember that right now, we have a FAKE GHOST NAME on the ballot in Minnesota All of those votes go to someone that does NOT EXIST. If the election goes through, she CANNOT BE SWORN IN — Eric Daugherty (@EricLDaugh) October 26, 2026

A second path would involve seating Omar before pursuing expulsion for misconduct. That disciplinary power requires a two-thirds House vote and was not the issue before the Supreme Court in Powell’s case.

Rep. Randy Fine of Florida has already threatened to seek that remedy if Omar is found not to be a citizen. “I absolutely will demand expulsion immediately,” Fine said Friday.

Rep. Ilhan Omar could face expulsion from Congress if the DOJ finds immigration fraud, as Rep. Randy Fine questions her citizenship and vows to demand her removal. A federal court filing identified Omar under a different name.

“I assume that she’s not a citizen, so we might not even have to do that,” Fine told Fox News Digital. Omar, a naturalized U.S. citizen since 2000, denies wrongdoing and calls the investigation politically motivated. Federal investigators are examining her immigration records and financial disclosures. See what agents have seized in the investigation: https://t.co/P9zdzo1bKI — Fox News (@FoxNews) October 23, 2026

Omar also faces a separate investigation into her financial disclosures, an inquiry U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro previously confirmed to Fox News. The review follows scrutiny of businesses connected to Omar’s current husband, Timothy Mynett, whose reported valuations reached as high as $30 million before Omar amended the filings and cited accounting errors.

No financial wrongdoing has been established. Still, Stimson pointed to the House’s 2023 expulsion of former Rep. George Santos as an example of lawmakers using their disciplinary authority over misconduct that began before a member entered office.

Former House counsel Michael Stern wrote that House investigators determined Santos’ misrepresentations continued while he served in Congress. “Thus, acts committed before a member’s first election may constitute disorderly behavior subject to congressional discipline, at least if the misconduct relates to the election and particularly if it involves deceiving the electorate,” Stern wrote.

Stimson called Omar’s situation largely “uncharted waters,” but said lawmakers could attempt to apply the same reasoning used in the Santos matter. “I think the argument would be, well, her misrepresentations continued during the time in Congress; they would pull a Santos and use the same logic that they used,” he said.

Any federal finding challenging Omar’s citizenship could produce a legal battle over the evidence and procedures necessary to determine whether she satisfies the Constitution’s requirements. Stimson said blaming her father would not hold up in court because people cannot legally benefit from another person’s criminal acts.

“The hard part for her is ‘how do you prove a negative’,” Stimson said. He later described the issue bluntly: “It’s a harsh world, but it’s a binary situation.”

The opinions expressed by contributors and/or content partners are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views of LifeZette. Contact us for guidelines on submitting your own commentary.