The battle over birthright citizenship in America has reached a critical juncture as a federal judge in Seattle delivered the first major blow to President Trump’s recent executive order. The controversial directive, which would end automatic citizenship for children born to non-citizen parents in the United States, faces mounting legal challenges from nearly two dozen states and multiple immigrant rights organizations.
Federal judge blocks Trump’s birthright citizenship order
U.S. District Judge John Coughenour issued a temporary restraining order on Thursday, effectively halting the implementation of President Trump’s executive order nationwide. During the hearing, Coughenour, a Reagan appointee with over four decades of experience on the bench, called the order “blatantly unconstitutional” and expressed strong skepticism about its legal foundation.
The case, brought by Arizona, Illinois, Oregon, and Washington, represents the first of five lawsuits challenging the order to receive a judicial hearing. The ruling comes as a significant setback to the administration’s attempts to reshape immigration policy.
Impact and scope of the executive order
The executive order, scheduled to take effect on February 19, could affect hundreds of thousands of newborns annually. According to data cited in the Seattle lawsuit, approximately 255,000 children were born to mothers without legal status in 2022, while about 153,000 births involved two parents without legal status.
Currently, the United States is among roughly 30 nations, including Canada and Mexico, that recognize birthright citizenship. This principle, known as jus soli or “right of the soil,” has been a cornerstone of American immigration policy for over a century.
Constitutional foundation and legal precedent
The 14th Amendment, ratified in 1868 following the Civil War, states: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.”
A landmark 1898 Supreme Court case involving Wong Kim Ark established important precedent for birthright citizenship. The Court ruled that Ark, born in San Francisco to Chinese immigrants, was a U.S. citizen by virtue of his birth on American soil, despite attempts to deny his reentry under the Chinese Exclusion Act.
However, some immigration restriction advocates argue that this precedent specifically addressed children of legal immigrants, leaving room for debate regarding children of parents without legal status.
Personal impact and ongoing legal challenges
The lawsuits include testimony from various affected parties, including Connecticut Attorney General William Tong, who stated this week, “There is no legitimate legal debate on this question. But the fact that Trump is dead wrong will not prevent him from inflicting serious harm right now on American families like my own.”
One lawsuit highlights the case of “Carmen,” a non-citizen who has lived in the United States for over 15 years and is currently pregnant. The legal filing argues that “Stripping children of the ‘priceless treasure’ of citizenship is a grave injury” that denies them “the full membership in U.S. society to which they are entitled.”
