Judge Issues Ruling Against Trump’s Birthright Citizenship Plan

Federal judge blocks Trump's birthright citizenship order, calling it unconstitutional; lawsuits challenge immigration crackdown. [Image via Reuters]

A federal judge in Seattle on Thursday blocked US President Donald Trump’s administration from implementing an executive order curtailing the right to automatic birthright citizenship in the United States, calling it “blatantly unconstitutional”.

US District Judge John Coughenour at the urging of four Democratic-led states issued a temporary restraining order preventing the administration from enforcing the order, which the Republican president signed on Monday during his first day in office.

“This is [a] blatantly unconstitutional order,” the judge told a lawyer with the US Justice Department defending Trump’s order.

The order has already become the subject of five lawsuits by civil rights groups and Democratic attorneys general from 22 states, who call it a flagrant violation of the US Constitution.

“Under this order, babies being born today don’t count as US citizens,” Washington Assistant Attorney General Lane Polozola told Senior US District Judge John Coughenour at the start of a hearing in Seattle.

Polozola — on behalf of Democratic state attorneys general from Washington state, Arizona, Illinois and Oregon — urged the judge to issue a temporary restraining order to prevent the administration from carrying out this key element of Trump’s immigration crackdown.

The challengers argue that Trump’s action violates the right enshrined in the citizenship clause of the Constitution’s 14th Amendment that provides that anyone born in the United States is a citizen.

Also See: Trump’s Return: A New Era or More of the Same?

Trump in his executive order directed US agencies to refuse to recognise the citizenship of children born in the United States if neither their mother nor father is a US citizen or legal permanent resident.

In a brief filed late on Wednesday, the US Justice Department called the order an “integral part” of the president’s efforts “to address this nation’s broken immigration system and the ongoing crisis at the southern border”.

The lawsuit filed in Seattle has been progressing more quickly than the four other cases brought over the executive order. It has been assigned to Coughenour, an appointee of Republican former president Ronald Reagan.

The judge potentially could rule from the bench after hearing arguments, or he could wait to write a decision ahead of Trump’s order taking effect.

Under the order, any children born after February 19 whose mothers or fathers are not citizens or lawful permanent residents would be subject to deportation and would be prevented from obtaining Social Security numbers, various government benefits and the ability as they get older to work lawfully.

More than 150,000 newborn children would be denied citizenship annually if Trump’s order is allowed to stand, according to the Democratic-led states.

Democratic state attorneys general have said that the understanding of the Constitution’s citizenship clause was cemented 127 years ago when the US Supreme Court held that children born in the United States to non-citizen parents are entitled to American citizenship.

The 14th Amendment was adopted in 1868 following the Civil War and overturned the Supreme Court’s notorious 1857 Dred Scott decision that had declared that the Constitution’s protections did not apply to enslaved Black people.

But the Justice Department in its brief argued that the 14th Amendment had never been interpreted to extend citizenship universally to everyone born in the country and that the Supreme Court’s 1898 ruling in United States v Wong Kim Ark concerned only children of permanent residents.

The Justice Department said the case by the four states also “flunks multiple threshold hurdles”. The department said that only individuals, not states, can pursue claims under the citizenship clause and that the states lack the necessary legal standing to sue over Trump’s order.

Thirty-six of Trump’s Republican allies in the US House of Representatives on Tuesday separately introduced legislation to restrict automatic citizenship to only children born to citizens or lawful permanent residents.

This news is sourced from The Express Tribune and is intended for informational purposes only.

News Desk

Your trusted source for insightful journalism. Stay informed with our compelling coverage of global affairs, business, technology, and more.

Recent

Centralized Power and the Core–Periphery Divide in Afghanistan

Centralized Power and the Core–Periphery Divide in Afghanistan

The Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan’s return in 2021 brought rapid consolidation of power, but also the revival of a historical flaw. By concentrating authority in the hands of southern Pashtun elites, the Taliban have recreated the core–periphery divide that has destabilized every Afghan regime since the 19th century. This hyper-centralization, rooted in ethnic exclusivity and Kandahar dominance, risks a repeat of past collapses as non-Pashtun regions turn toward functional autonomy.

Read More »
Broken Promises: The Taliban’s Betrayal of Global Commitments

Broken Promises: The Taliban’s Betrayal of Global Commitments

Nearly three years after seizing power, the Taliban’s systematic violation of their international commitments under the 2020 Doha Accord has transformed Afghanistan into a sanctuary for terrorism, entrenched an autocratic regime, and institutionalized gender apartheid. Beyond moral failure, this deceit poses a grave threat to regional stability, international counterterrorism efforts, and the credibility of global diplomacy. Holding the regime accountable is now a strategic necessity, not a choice.

Read More »
Do You Remember 6/11/ 1947?: A Forgotten Jammu Genocide and the Continuing Erasure of Kashmiriyat

Do You Remember 6/11/ 1947?: A Forgotten Jammu Genocide and the Continuing Erasure of Kashmiriyat

On November 6, 1947, one of South Asia’s earliest genocides unfolded in Jammu, where hundreds of thousands of Muslims were massacred or forced to flee. Yet, unlike other global tragedies, this atrocity remains buried in silence. The Jammu Genocide not only reshaped the region’s demography but laid the foundation for India’s ongoing campaign of identity erasure in Kashmir. From demographic engineering to cultural censorship, the spirit of Kashmiriyat continues to face systematic annihilation.

Read More »
India’s Climate Policy after COP28: Net Zero 2070 — A Fair Promise or a Risky Postponement?

India’s Climate Policy after COP28: Net Zero 2070 — A Fair Promise or a Risky Postponement?

India’s Net Zero 2070 target reflects a delicate balance between development equity and climate urgency. While progress in renewables, green finance, and adaptation is visible, the absence of clear interim milestones risks turning ambition into delay. The real challenge lies in translating a distant horizon into measurable, near-term climate action before 2030.

Read More »
The Tehreek-e-Hijrat of 1920 and Its Parallels with Contemporary Refugee Politics

The Tehreek-e-Hijrat of 1920 and Its Parallels with Contemporary Refugee Politics

The Tehreek-e-Hijrat of 1920 saw thousands of Indian Muslims migrate to Afghanistan, only to be turned away when Kabul could no longer cope. A century later, Afghan officials criticise Pakistan’s refugee policies while ignoring their own historical refusal to host Muslim migrants. The parallel reveals not just irony, but the enduring challenge of compassion, capacity, and collective responsibility.

Read More »