President Donald Trump called Thursday for Rep. Ilhan Omar to resign from Congress after federal prosecutors identified the Minnesota Democrat under another name in a court filing, reigniting longstanding allegations concerning her personal history, immigration records, and previous marriage.

Speaking at a political rally in Iowa, Trump accused Omar of having used a fraudulent name when she entered Congress and suggested that the disclosure should cost Democrats another seat in the House of Representatives.

The controversy erupted after a filing submitted Wednesday by the office of U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro in Washington, D.C., referred to the congresswoman as “Ilhan Nur Said Elmi, a/k/a Ilhan Abdullahi Omar.”

The appearance of the name Elmi in a federal court document prompted renewed scrutiny of Omar’s background, particularly because the same surname belongs to a man she previously married and whose relationship to her has been the subject of years of disputed allegations.

Trump seized on the development during his appearance in Iowa, declaring that Omar had obtained her congressional position under a name that was not hers.

“It was just revealed just a little while ago that … her name is not Ilhan Omar, the one that she used to get elected and sworn into Congress,” Trump said. “She used a fake name to be sworn in.

“I assume she must immediately have to resign from Congress.”

The president then suggested that Omar’s departure was already inevitable, telling supporters, “The Republicans have just picked up a seat in the House.”

Despite Trump’s assertions, the court filing does not establish that Omar committed identity fraud or improperly obtained her congressional seat. She has not been charged with any crime, and her office has categorically rejected allegations that she used a fictitious identity.

The disputed identification appeared in documents connected to a federal investigation involving a search warrant for Omar’s Washington residence. Prosecutors submitted the filing while asking a federal judge to keep the warrant confidential as investigators completed its execution.

The New York Times and other media organizations had sought access to the warrant materials, prompting the government’s effort to maintain the documents under seal.

According to Fox News Digital, two individuals familiar with the matter claimed that Omar was not born with the surname under which she serves in Congress. Separately, a source familiar with the investigation told the New York Post that Elmi was her original family name.

Omar’s representatives strongly disputed those accounts.

“This is completely false. Ilhan Omar is her real name,” a spokesperson told Fox News Digital.

The spokesperson also denounced the allegations as a “desperate smear” designed to divert public attention from the Trump administration and Republican leadership, calling it “disgraceful that the media continues to give this lie oxygen.”

Attorney General Todd Blanche was questioned by the New York Post about the name appearing in the Justice Department’s filing. Although he did not publicly establish whether the identification was accurate, he said he did not believe federal prosecutors “would make up names.”

The latest controversy has also revived questions surrounding Omar’s former husband, Ahmed Nur Said Elmi, whom she married in 2009 and divorced in 2017.

For years, political opponents and other critics have circulated allegations that Elmi is actually Omar’s brother and that their marriage was connected to immigration-related misconduct. Those claims have not been substantiated by publicly established evidence, and Omar has repeatedly rejected them.

In 2016, she described the accusation as “absurd and offensive.”

The subject resurfaced Wednesday during Omar’s appearance on MS Now with Chris Hayes, when she was questioned about the allegations and her relationship to her former husband.

Omar dismissed the suggestion as “insane.”

When asked directly whether she was related to Elmi, she responded, “Not to my knowledge.”

That answer drew particular attention from Trump, who repeated it during Thursday’s rally and suggested that the wording was revealing.

“That tells you a lot right there,” the president told the Iowa audience.

Trump also delivered a broader denunciation of Omar, criticizing her political record and making disparaging remarks about Somalia, the East African country where she was born.

“She’s been a scammer for a long time. I’m pretty good at watching that stuff, and she comes from a non-country, basically. Somalia has no government, has no nothing. … All they do is run around shooting each other. Then she comes over here. The Constitution gives me absolute right to freedom of speech,” Trump said.

The dispute comes amid reports of an expanding federal investigation into Omar’s immigration history and the accuracy of information submitted in connection with her entry into the United States.

According to the New York Post, agents from Homeland Security Investigations searched Omar’s residence in Washington on October 12, confiscating her cellphone, computer, and passport.

The newspaper further reported that federal prosecutors in Minnesota have been examining whether Omar supplied inaccurate information on immigration-related documents. Investigative steps reportedly have included interviews with family members and the collection of DNA evidence.

Those investigative activities, as described in the reports, have not resulted in publicly announced criminal charges against the congresswoman.

Omar’s background has long been a subject of political debate. Born in Somalia, she fled the country’s civil war with her family in 1991. The family subsequently spent approximately four years in a refugee camp in Kenya before immigrating to the United States.

Omar has previously stated that her original birth certificate was destroyed, a circumstance that has complicated efforts to independently reconstruct portions of her early personal history.

The congresswoman has consistently maintained that her identity and immigration history are legitimate, rejecting accusations that she engaged in fraud or misrepresented family relationships.

The identification contained in the Justice Department filing nevertheless introduces a new element into the longstanding controversy because it places the disputed name in an official federal court submission rather than solely in political commentary or media allegations.

At the same time, the use of an alternative name in a legal filing does not, by itself, demonstrate wrongdoing. Individuals may legally use different surnames over the course of their lives, and the filing does not explain the basis on which prosecutors included the Elmi identification.

The distinction is particularly significant given Trump’s demand for Omar’s immediate resignation. No court has determined that she assumed a fraudulent identity to take office, and the allegations remain contested.

The president’s remarks also intensified an already bitter political confrontation between the White House and Omar, who has been among Trump’s most outspoken congressional critics.

With federal investigators reportedly continuing their work and the disputed court documents drawing heightened attention, the controversy is likely to remain a major political issue as the November congressional elections approach.

For now, Omar remains a member of Congress, her office continues to deny the allegations, and the Justice Department has not publicly established that the alternative name appearing in its filing reflects criminal misconduct.

Additional reporting has also brought attention to the legal dispute surrounding the search of Omar’s home. Her attorneys, Amy Jeffress and Joshua Matz, have accused federal investigators of disregarding restrictions imposed by a magistrate judge to protect the constitutional rights of a sitting member of Congress.

In correspondence sent to the Justice Department on October 16, the attorneys demanded the return of property seized during the search and requested that investigators preserve any audio or video recordings of the operation.

The legal team characterized the investigation as politically motivated, arguing that the government had improperly targeted one of Trump’s most prominent congressional opponents shortly before the midterm elections.

The Justice Department has maintained that investigators followed lawful procedures.

Meanwhile, the dispute over the search warrant has drawn interest from multiple news organizations and Judicial Watch, which have sought the release of sealed court records.

Federal prosecutors have asked for additional time to respond to those requests, arguing that the search warrant has not yet been fully executed. The government has proposed providing a status update after the warrant’s execution is completed, while also requesting additional time to address the applications for disclosure.

The procedural filing does not explain why prosecutors identified Omar using the Elmi surname, leaving unresolved one of the central questions driving the controversy.

Whether additional court records will clarify that identification, or disclose evidence supporting the government’s investigation, remains uncertain.