- Four U.S. states challenge President Trump’s birthright citizenship executive order.
- Order denies citizenship to children of undocumented or temporary visa-holding parents.
- Plaintiffs argue it violates the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
- Department of Justice defends the order, citing immigration reform goals.
- The court’s ruling may set the stage for a Supreme Court battle.
A federal court in Seattle will hear a crucial case on Thursday, 23 January, as Washington, Arizona, Illinois, and Oregon jointly request a temporary halt to President Donald Trump’s executive order. This order, signed earlier this week, seeks to eliminate birthright citizenship for children born to undocumented immigrants and temporary visa holders.
What Is Birthright Citizenship?
Birthright citizenship is a constitutional guarantee under the 14th Amendment, granting automatic U.S. citizenship to individuals born on American soil. Advocates argue that it is a cornerstone of equal rights, while opponents claim it incentivizes illegal immigration. The debate revolves around the amendment’s phrase “subject to the jurisdiction thereof,” which remains a legal flashpoint.
The States’ Argument
The states challenging the order argue that the president lacks authority to unilaterally alter constitutional rights. They assert that the 14th Amendment guarantees citizenship to anyone born in the U.S., irrespective of their parents’ immigration status.
The lawsuit highlights potential harm: “The individuals stripped of their citizenship will face detention or removal and may become stateless.” The states further claim that the order would disproportionately disrupt families and communities.
The Department of Justice (DOJ) defends the executive order, offering a different interpretation of the 14th Amendment. They argue that the jurisdiction clause excludes children of non-citizens who are unlawfully present in the U.S. According to the DOJ, the order is a necessary step to address the country’s “broken immigration system and ongoing crisis at the southern border.”
They also contend that a temporary restraining order would delay efforts to implement essential immigration reforms.
Implications of the Case
The outcome of this case could have profound implications for immigration policy and constitutional law. Official records show that 255,000 children were born to undocumented mothers in the U.S. in 2022. If upheld, the order could impact thousands of families and lead to widespread legal uncertainty.
Legal experts predict that the issue may ultimately reach the Supreme Court, as it involves fundamental questions about constitutional rights and presidential powers.
A Broader Legal Battle
This lawsuit is part of a broader wave of legal challenges. A coalition of 18 Democratic-led states, alongside advocacy groups like the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), has filed separate cases. Connecticut Attorney General William Tong, a birthright citizen himself, called the executive order “unconstitutional” and a direct attack on established legal principles.
“There is no legitimate legal debate on this question,” Tong said. “It’s settled law.”
Thursday’s hearing, presided over by Judge John Coughenour of the Western District of Washington, will be a pivotal moment in the fight over Trump’s executive order. His decision could either halt the order or allow its implementation, potentially shaping U.S. immigration policy for years to come.