A federal judge in Seattle has signed a temporary restraining order blocking President Donald Trump’s executive order on birthright citizenship.
U.S. District Judge John Coughenour on Thursday heard a petition from four Democratic-led states. executive order Signed by Trump, it seeks to limit birthright citizenship to people with at least one parent. United States citizen or permanent resident.
Trump’s executive order reinterpreting the 14th Amendment’s birthright guarantee of citizenship — which Trump long promised on the campaign trail — is expected to spark a lengthy legal challenge that could define the president’s broad immigration agenda.
Democratic attorneys general in 22 states and two cities Trump has been sued over the executive order, and the president has at least five separate lawsuits over the policy.
On Thursday in Maryland, a federal judge held a pre-hearing conference by telephone in a challenge by two nonprofit groups and five pregnant undocumented women seeking to temporarily block the order from taking effect.
U.S. District Judge Deborah Boardman asked the DOJ whether a child born in the United States this evening to parents subject to the executive order would be a U.S. citizen.
“As I read the executive order, the answer is yes,” responded DOJ attorney Brad Rosenberg, who suggested that enforcement of the order will not begin until February 19, based on Section 2(b) of the executive order that governs the agency. stop issuing citizenship documents to newborns born 30 days after the order was issued.
President Donald Trump signs executive orders in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington, Jan. 20, 2025.
Carlos Barria/Reuters
The DOJ argued that “any temporary or emergency relief in the immediate short term is unnecessary and inappropriate,” saying that to their knowledge, the agencies “have not yet taken steps to enforce the order.”
But the plaintiffs were not convinced by the DOJ that the executive order would not immediately apply to newborns.
“We think the executive order is perhaps less clear than Mr. Rosenberg has suggested,” said Joseph Mead, the plaintiff’s attorney.
DOJ attorneys acknowledged that they have not had a chance to consult with the agencies about whether they have taken steps to enforce the order.
The judge scheduled a hearing on the matter for February 5.
In Seattle, Judge Coughenour — appointed to the bench by President Ronald Reagan in 1981 — scheduled a personal hearing Thursday on the lawsuit brought by the attorneys general of Arizona, Oregon, Washington and Illinois. In a federal complaint filed Tuesday, the four attorneys general argued that Trump’s policy would violate federal law and the 14th Amendment and illegally remove up to 150,000 newborn babies each year.
“Plaintiff states will also suffer irreparable harm because thousands of children will be born within their borders but denied full participation and opportunity in American society,” the lawsuit states. “Without temporary removal orders, children born in plaintiff States will soon be undocumented, subject to removal or detention and many will be left stateless.”
The lawsuit claims that enforcing Trump’s executive order would cause irreparable harm to children born to undocumented parents, denying them the right to “full participation and opportunity in American society.”
“They will lose the right to vote, to be members of the jury and to run for certain positions,” says the complaint. “And they will be placed in positions of lifelong instability and insecurity as part of a new American underclass.”
Attorneys for the Justice Department, now under new leadership, opposed the request for a temporary restraining order in court Wednesday.
Taking effect next month, Trump’s executive order seeks to reinterpret the 14th Amendment’s birthright guarantee of citizenship, arguing that a child born in the US to an undocumented mother cannot receive citizenship unless the father is a citizen or green card holder.
Although most countries grant citizenship to children based on their parents, the United States and more than two dozen countries, including Canada and Mexico, follow the principle of jus soli, or “right to the land.”
After the Civil War, the United States codified jus soli through the 14th Amendment, which the Supreme Court ruled in Dred Scott v. Denying that African Americans in Sanford had no right to citizenship.
“President Trump and the federal government now want to impose a modern version of Dred Scott. But nothing in the Constitution gives the president, federal agencies, or anyone else the authority to set conditions for granting citizenship to people born in the United States,” the states’ lawsuit argued.
The Supreme Court further established birthright citizenship in 1898 when it found that the son of Chinese immigrants born in San Francisco was an American citizen, despite the Chinese Exclusion Act restricting immigration from China and barring Chinese Americans from becoming naturalized citizens.
In seeking to end birthright citizenship, Trump’s executive order relies on the same phrase in the 14th Amendment — “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” — that the Supreme Court considered in 1898. Trump’s executive order says the text of the 14th Amendment excludes children. Those born to parents who are not “under the jurisdiction” of the United States, such as those who are in the United States illegally
While legal experts have expressed skepticism about the legality of Trump’s executive order, the case could set the stage for a lengthy legal battle that ends up before the Supreme Court.
