Was inspired by this post on Blind, https://www.teamblind.com/us/s/yUjnjpV0 which is claiming that the current US President said he wants to deport Musk.

Now, that's actually wrong. From actual news articles, like https://www.newsweek.com/could-elon-musk-deported-donald-trump-what-know-2081809 , we know that it's actually Steve Bannon calling for this, not Drumpf.

Usually, if Bannon is the one saying something, you just automatically know it's wrong. But I think it's worth digging into a bit.

The WP has a couple of good articles about Elon Musk working illegally, see https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2024/10/26/elon-musk-immigration-status/ and https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2024/11/01/musk-illegal-work-trump-immigration/

The thing is, while this might be technically true (Elon had a J-1 visa but worked without attending school and thus was working illegally), Elon actually did have a legal pathway to do what he wanted.

Elon is and was born Canadian, and Canadians have favourable access to the US. Especially with NAFTA, he'd have been able to use the TN-1 visa.

As per https://www.bdzlaw.com/nafta,-tn-blog/applicant-ownership-in-company-sponsoring-tn-visa the TN-1 visa doesn't allow for self-employment, and being sole owner of a business counts.

The key is to have a person in the US (almost certainly someone who's a US citizen or green card holder) form the business, and that you own a minority stake only. In the case of Zip2, the startup Musk helped found, it turns out that - as per the Post - there were at least three co-founders, "the Musk brothers and another Canadian co-founder". So even in the beginning, Musk himself would have had no more than a 33% minority stake at most, and perhaps even less than that. This would only shrink as new angel investors were brought on.

So if Musk had a US person contact who could have helped him found the company, then Zip2 would have qualified to sponsor a TN-1 visa for him. (The last bit is concerning actual control, but between the Musk brothers and the third Canadian co-founder, Musk would have had a good argument that he didn't had sole control himself. Also remember that TN-1 visas are applied for at the border in a matter of hours, and sometimes accountants and lawyers need to spend months to figure out who had actual control.)

From the TN-1 Musk could have directly gotten a green card, or perhaps he would have preferred to get an H1b visa. (I think the main difference is that TN-1 to GC direct requires leaving the US briefly, while TN-1 to H1b and H1b to GC can both be done without leaving.)

Of course, when Musk first started this, he probably couldn't afford to check with a lawyer, and the internet was not back then what it is now. So he might not have known how to do this.

The WP does make this point, "a determination that he had been less than truthful with immigration authorities" - but remember that by the time he would have switched visas, Zip2 was already paying for his lawyer. After it was sold, Musk was a multimillionaire. Since Musk's immigration history and records are not public, there's no evidence this was the case. In fact I'd bank on the opposite - that the lawyer would have truthfully disclosed everything, pointed out that there was a legal pathway to do it even if Musk didn't, and asked for discretion and forgiveness. (This was the case as late as 2024, see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dqx2AZPYsvM ) Under Dubya's administration I can easily see the gov't deciding that Musk's business ability was worth the forgiveness. Also, the legal requirement (being an immediate relative of a US citizen, such as a parent of a US citizen) would have been met by Musk via Musk's daughter Nevada Musk.

So there's actually a very good chance that Musk never fraudulently misrepresented or lied to the government on this matter.

Finally, even if Musk had lied when becoming a citizen, perhaps he shouldn't then be eligible for a security clearance. But there's good reason to say that he shouldn't be denaturalized (stripped of his US citizenship). Musk became a US citizen in 2002, or roughly 23 years ago.

Note that from https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/FSupp2/86/1009/2398201/ administrative denaturalization must occur within "two years after she was naturalized" and if going through the court system, criminal denaturalization has a 10 year limit as per https://www.immigrantdefenseproject.org/wp-content/uploads/Advisory-for-Defense-Attorneys_-Identifying-clients-at-risk-of-denaturalization-02-2025.pdf - so Musk is well beyond the time limits for these.

Musk technically remains eligible for civil denaturalization with the courts as there's no time limit for this, but as per Valerio v. USINS, 86 F. Supp. 2d 1009 (D. Haw. 1999) https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/FSupp2/86/1009/2398201/,

The decision whether to institute denaturalization proceedings is discretionary. In exercising its discretion, the Justice Department is guided by the longstanding policy that denaturalization should not be sought "unless some substantial results are to be achieved thereby in the way of betterment of the citizenship of the country." Department of Justice Circular Letter No. 107, Sept. 20, 1909 § 15; see also 7 Charles Gordon et al., Immigration Law and Procedure § 96.09 (rev. ed.1999); 3C Am. Jur.2d Aliens and Citizens § 3039 (1998). In light of this policy, a twelve-year citizen of apparent good standing ... would seem to be an unlikely target of denaturalization proceedings.

Even denaturalization for something as serious as being an active spy for another country, has traditionally been brought much faster than this. See https://arizonadailyindependent.com/2021/01/05/why-hasnt-the-u-s-deported-xunmei-grace-li/ and https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/arizona/azdce/2:2012cv00482/684044/220/ - the timeline is becoming a citizen in May 2005, but being investigated in 2007, convicted of immigration violations in 2009 - so within five years. It took longer for the court system to actually grant the denaturalization, but that happened by 2014 - so still within ten years.

If it was anyone other than Musk, denaturalization wouldn't make sense, period. And rule of law means we can't treat Musk as a special case. And without denaturalization there can be no deportation.