Federal officials are moving to deport a central Iowa couple who is suing the government over a five-year delay in processing their naturalization application.
The stated rationale for the attempted removal of Justin and Victoria Kokeh from the United States is that the couple lied in 2013 when they claimed to have no children. According to court filings in the case, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security took no action in the matter until recently, after the Kokehs sued Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem to force a decision in their naturalization case.
The Kokehs, who have lived in Altoona and Des Moines in recent years, sued Noem and U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services officials in February. The lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Iowa, alleges the couple, originally from Liberia, has waited five years for CIS to process their N-400 applications for naturalization.
Federal officials are moving to deport a central Iowa couple who is suing the government over a five-year delay in processing their naturalization application.
The stated rationale for the attempted removal of Justin and Victoria Kokeh from the United States is that the couple lied in 2013 when they claimed to have no children. According to court filings in the case, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security took no action in the matter until recently, after the Kokehs sued Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem to force a decision in their naturalization case.
The Kokehs, who have lived in Altoona and Des Moines in recent years, sued Noem and U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services officials in February. The lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Iowa, alleges the couple, originally from Liberia, has waited five years for CIS to process their N-400 applications for naturalization.
They allege CIS’ Des Moines field office typically takes eight months to process such applications, but that they’ve waited five years, leading to “irreparable harm.”
Although the couple filed their lawsuit in February 2025, and amended it in May 2025, the federal government did not file a response in the case until last week when lawyers for Homeland Security informed the court that because the agency had recently “instituted removal proceedings” against the couple, their application could not be processed and the court lacked jurisdiction in the matter.
According to filings by lawyers for DHS, the removal proceedings are “based on allegations that (the Kokehs) engaged in fraud in connection with the procurement of a visa to come to the United States in 2013.”
In an affidavit filed with the court, CIS Immigration Services Officer Jonathan Lochman of the Des Moines field office stated that in December 2013, the Kokehs were interviewed in Liberia as part of the process of entering the United States. He stated that in April 2014, the Kokehs entered the U.S. on a “diversity visa” and, that same day, their status was adjusted to “conditional, lawful permanent residents.”
In January 2020, the Kokehs initiated the naturalization process by filing applications with CIS, after which CIS interviewed the two, Lochman told the court. At some point, the government now alleges, CIS concluded the Kokehs had lied in their December 2013 interviews when they claimed to have no children.
CIS never acted on that information, or ruled on the naturalization application, according to the government’s court filings.
In February 2025, however, the Kokehs sued CIS, seeking a court order to compel the agency’s staff to “perform their duties” as required by law. Five weeks later, in early April, CIS initiated removal proceedings against the couple.
Based on those proceedings, Homeland Security and CIS then filed papers seeking dismissal of the Kokehs’ lawsuit, arguing that with removal proceedings pending, the agency cannot process the couple’s naturalization application and that the court lacks jurisdiction in the matter.
The Kokehs’ attorney, who declined to comment on the matter Monday, has yet to file a response to the motion for dismissal. CIS officials did not respond to a request for comment on their handling of the case.
