A-score (21.5): Denaturalization actions create real constitutional concerns across multiple drivers. Civil_rights (4.5) scores highest as citizenship revocation affects fundamental status and rights. Rule_of_law (4.0) reflects concerns about retroactive application and due process standards. Election (3.5) captures voter eligibility implications and political targeting potential. Separation (2.0) for executive enforcement discretion. Capture (2.5) and corruption (1.5) reflect potential politicization of citizenship decisions. Enforcement_action mechanism adds +15% modifier. Federal scope with narrow population yields 0.85 modifier. Severity: durability 1.1 (citizenship loss is lasting), reversibility 0.95 (legally reversible but practically difficult), precedent 1.15 (establishes aggressive enforcement template). B-score (24.9): Layer 1 (13.2/24): High outrage_bait (7.5) - citizenship revocation triggers visceral reactions. Strong media_friendliness (7.0) - clear narrative of government overreach. Moderate novelty (5.5) - denaturalization exists but aggressive pursuit is notable. Lower meme_ability (4.0). Layer 2 (11.0/24.5): Pattern_match (6.5) fits immigration enforcement narratives. Mismatch (6.0) between 'eligible immigrants' framing and revocation action. Timing (5.0) and narrative_pivot (4.5) moderate. Intentionality 8/15 (53% modulation) for enforcement theater and symbolic targeting. D-score: -3.4 (close to Mixed threshold). Both scores approach 25, difference within ±10.