· ·

Ilhan Nur Said Elmi: Why a DOJ Filing Used That Name for Omar

A DOJ motion calls Rep. Ilhan Omar “Ilhan Nur Said Elmi.” What the filing says, her response, and the laws legal experts cite. No charges filed.

ByPeter
Woman in a white headwrap smiles while speaking into a microphone at a training event
Rep. Ilhan Omar speaks at a VoteRunLead training, May 6, 2018. Photo: Zoe Griffing Heller, CC0, via Wikimedia Commons.

WASHINGTON — A Justice Department court filing dated Oct. 21, 2026, refers to Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., as “Congresswoman Ilhan Nur Said Elmi, a/k/a Ilhan Abdullahi Omar.” The motion, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, does not explain why prosecutors used that name. As of Oct. 23, Omar had not been charged with any crime, and she denies wrongdoing.

Omar has not announced or filed for a change of name. The “new name” circulating online comes from how prosecutors captioned her in this filing, not from any legal name change.

Full explainer: see our Ilhan Omar DOJ investigation page for the court filings, a timeline, statements and deadlines.

What the filing says

The three-page motion concerns three requests to unseal records tied to the Oct. 12 search of Omar’s Washington residence. Fourteen press organizations, The New York Times Company and Judicial Watch filed those requests on Oct. 15, according to the motion. Prosecutors asked the court to delay their response until “after the subject search warrant has been fully executed,” then report back within 30 days. The applicants oppose the request, the filing says.

The motion is signed for U.S. Attorney Jeanine Ferris Pirro by her office’s civil and criminal division chiefs and by an associate deputy attorney general. It does not describe the evidence, name an offense or explain the “a/k/a” wording. EconoTimes noted that the filing “provides no evidence that Omar ever used the name.”

Where the name Elmi comes from

Omar said in a 2016 statement that she legally married Ahmed Nur Said Elmi in 2009, EconoTimes reported. Fox News reported that the couple split in 2017. An allegation that Elmi is her brother has circulated since her 2016 state legislative campaign, and Omar has denied it. In 2019 the Minneapolis Star Tribune said a review of public records did not settle that claim either way, according to EconoTimes.

Fox News, citing two people familiar with the investigation, including a law enforcement source, reported that “Ilhan Nur Said Elmi” is her “real name.” The New York Post said a source confirmed that account. Neither outlet published a document showing it.

Asked about the name, Attorney General Todd Blanche told the New York Post, “I don’t think AUSAs [Assistant United States Attorneys] would make up names,” adding, “Evidence that’s collected is used in motions.”

On Oct. 22, U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro went further on Fox News. Asked by host Jesse Watters whether Ilhan Omar is her real name, Pirro answered, “Her real name is Ilhan Nur Sayed Elmi,” IBTimes UK reported. Asked whether Omar serves in Congress under an alias, Pirro said, “You’ll have to ask her what she considers her name,” and declined to say what had drawn investigators’ attention. She did not present evidence during the interview, according to IBTimes UK.

Woman in a black headscarf and denim jacket holds a paper ballot beside poll workers in a school gym
Rep. Ilhan Omar at her Minneapolis polling place, Nov. 5, 2024. Photo: Taylor Dahlin, CC BY 2.0, via Wikimedia Commons.

Omar’s response

In an interview with MS NOW host Chris Hayes that aired Oct. 21, Omar called the brother allegation “insane,” Yahoo News reported. Asked whether she was related to Elmi at all, she answered, “Not to my knowledge.” Describing the 6 a.m. search, she said, “you don’t show up to somebody’s house that early in the morning unless you’re trying to freak them out.” Her office has said she did nothing wrong, and she calls the investigation political retaliation by President Donald Trump.

Responding to Pirro, Omar’s spokesperson told Fox News Digital, “This is completely false. Ilhan Omar is her real name,” according to IBTimes UK. The spokesperson also said the “Not to my knowledge” answer was sarcastic and that Omar has “repeatedly and unequivocally” denied the brother allegation, Fox News reported. After Trump wrote on Truth Social on Oct. 22 that Omar uses a “fake name” and called for her to resign, Omar replied on X on Oct. 23: “My name has always been Ilhan Omar.”

Possible charges: what has been cited

No prosecutor, member of Congress or court filing has publicly named a specific statute Omar is accused of violating. The search warrant and its supporting records remain sealed. People familiar with the probe have described it to reporters as an immigration fraud inquiry involving paperwork her late father completed when she was a child, according to Yahoo News. Those descriptions are unconfirmed on the record.

Legal commentators have discussed the laws that typically govern such cases. These are not charges, and any allegation would have to be proven in court.

  • 18 U.S.C. 1425, unlawful procurement of naturalization (criminal). Cited by law professors Josh Blackman and Seth Barrett Tillman, writing at Reason’s Volokh Conspiracy. The statute applies to “whoever knowingly procures or attempts to procure, contrary to law, the naturalization of any person.” A first offense carries up to 10 years in prison. Guilt must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt to a jury.
  • 18 U.S.C. 3291, the 10-year time limit. Under this section, no one may be prosecuted under sections 1423 to 1428 “unless the indictment is found or the information is instituted within ten years after the commission of the offense.” Former acting ICE Director Jonathan Fahey told The National News Desk, “She was naturalized in 2000, I believe. So the statute of limitations is ten years,” absent exceptions such as “an ongoing conspiracy.”
  • 8 U.S.C. 1451, revocation of naturalization (civil). Fahey said that “if she’s going to be denaturalized, more likely it would be under the civil context.” The statute directs U.S. attorneys to sue to revoke citizenship “illegally procured or … procured by concealment of a material fact or by willful misrepresentation.” Blackman and Tillman note that it has no limitations period and requires “clear, convincing, and unequivocal evidence,” with no jury.

Status: no charges and no denaturalization suit had been filed as of Oct. 23. Fahey also said the government “would need to go in front of a judge” and prove fraud by clear and convincing evidence.

What comes next

On Oct. 22, Chief U.S. District Judge James Boasberg granted only part of the government’s request for more time, the Daily Wire reported. Rather than wait until the warrant is fully executed, he gave prosecutors until Oct. 27 to respond to the applications, noting they could “argue in part that the Court should not address the matter yet.” The applicants have until Oct. 30 to reply. Boasberg also allowed the government’s supporting memorandum to stay sealed, writing that he would order a redacted version filed publicly if he concluded one should be. Omar is on the Nov. 3 ballot seeking a fifth term.

Sources

Related coverage

Additional sources

Recommended articles