According to a report by ABC News, President Donald Trump’s attempt to revoke birthright citizenship is being challenged in court as a “flagrantly unlawful attempt to strip hundreds of thousands of American-born children of their citizenship based on their parentage.” This assertion comes from attorneys representing 18 states, the city of San Francisco, and the District of Columbia in a lawsuit filed following the president’s executive order, signed just hours after his inauguration.
The lawsuit, led by 18 Democratic attorneys general, accuses Trump of attempting to eliminate a “well-established and longstanding Constitutional principle” through executive action. It states, “The President has no authority to rewrite or nullify a constitutional amendment or duly enacted statute. Nor is he empowered by any other source of law to limit who receives United States citizenship at birth.”
Later in the day, four additional states joined the legal challenge, bringing the total number of states opposing the executive order to 22.
On Tuesday evening, U.S. District Judge John Coughenour scheduled a hearing for Thursday morning to consider a request from the four states for a temporary restraining order against the implementation of Trump’s executive order. Judge Coughenour, nominated by former President Ronald Reagan, is expected to be the first judge to evaluate the legality of Trump’s directive.
The executive order instructs federal agencies to stop issuing citizenship documents to U.S.-born children of undocumented mothers or those on temporary visas if their fathers are not U.S. citizens or permanent residents. According to the lawsuit, approximately 150,000 children born annually to noncitizen parents could lose access to essential services such as health care, foster care, and educational interventions for children with disabilities. “They will all be deportable, and many will be stateless,” the lawsuit warns.
The states involved in the lawsuit also raised concerns that the executive order could jeopardize federal funding for programs serving children regardless of their immigration status. While Trump’s order seeks to unilaterally end birthright citizenship, the lawsuit contends that only the U.S. Supreme Court has the authority to interpret the 14th Amendment regarding citizenship.
New Jersey Attorney General Matthew Platkin emphasized the constitutional implications, stating, “President Trump’s attempt to unilaterally end birthright citizenship is a flagrant violation of our Constitution.” He noted that for over 150 years, it has been a fundamental rule that children born in the U.S. are American citizens. Platkin characterized Trump’s order as “an extreme and unprecedented act” and asserted, “Presidents in this country have broad power. But they are not kings.”
New York Attorney General Letitia James echoed these sentiments, stating, “The great promise of our nation is that everyone born here is a citizen of the United States, able to achieve the American dream.” She highlighted that birthright citizenship, rooted in the 14th Amendment and born from the ashes of slavery, is a crucial element of the nation’s commitment to justice.
California Attorney General Rob Bonta expressed readiness to confront the challenges posed by a second Trump administration, insisting that progress in California would continue and prevail. The states are seeking to invalidate Trump’s executive order and halt any actions taken to enforce it, requesting a preliminary injunction to prevent the order from taking effect.
Additionally, nonprofit organizations in Massachusetts and New Hampshire have filed federal lawsuits challenging the executive order.
Leave a Reply