2.6 C
New York
Thursday, February 13, 2025

Federal Judge Temporarily Blocks Trump’s Order to End Birthright Citizenship

Must read

SEATTLE, USA – A federal judge in Seattle has temporarily blocked former President Donald Trump’s executive order aimed at ending birthright citizenship for children born in the United States to migrants without legal status.

The ruling, issued Thursday, January 23, 2025, by U.S. District Judge John C. Coughenour, follows a lawsuit filed by several states opposing the controversial order.

Judge Coughenour granted a temporary restraining order, halting the implementation of Trump’s executive order, which was signed on Monday, pending further legal review.

During a packed hearing in Seattle, the judge described the order as “blatantly unconstitutional.”

“I’ve been on the bench for four decades, and I can’t remember another case where the question presented is as clear as this one is,” Coughenour said during the proceedings.

The judge cited the 14th Amendment, which guarantees citizenship to all persons born or naturalised in the United States, as the basis for his decision.

Widespread Legal Challenges

The lawsuit, brought by Oregon, Arizona, Illinois, and Washington state, is one of several legal challenges mounted against the administration’s effort to redefine the constitutional right of birthright citizenship.

The states argue that the order violates the Constitution and would upend decades of legal precedent.

Washington Attorney General Nick Brown hailed the judge’s decision, calling it a critical first step in stopping what he described as an “unconstitutional and un-American” policy.

“To hear the judge say that, in his 40 years on the bench, he has never seen something so blatantly unconstitutional sets the tone for the seriousness of this effort,” Brown said.

California Attorney General Rob Bonta, whose state has also joined the lawsuits, echoed the sentiment.

“Any court that is fair, that is objective, that looks at the facts and applies the law, I believe will find the same way,” he told NPR.

Bonta highlighted the potential impact of the order, noting that approximately 25,000 children born in California each year would be affected.

“If this order were to take effect, these children would be deportable at any time and lose access to critical federal programs, including food assistance, housing, Medicaid, and the Children’s Health Insurance Programme,” Bonta said.

Trump’s Response and Next Steps

Trump, speaking at the White House on Thursday, dismissed the ruling and vowed to appeal.

“Obviously, we’ll appeal it,” he said, maintaining that the executive order aligns with his vision for immigration reform.

A spokesperson for the Department of Justice confirmed that the administration would “vigorously defend” the order.

“We look forward to presenting a full merits argument to the Court and to the American people, who are desperate to see our nation’s laws enforced,” the spokesperson said in an email to NPR.

Constitutional Debate

The 14th Amendment, ratified in 1868, declares that all persons “born or naturalised in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof,” are citizens.

For decades, this clause has been interpreted to grant citizenship to nearly anyone born on U.S. soil.

However, some conservative legal scholars and politicians, including Trump, have argued that the provision should exclude children of undocumented migrants.

In his executive order, Trump described U.S. citizenship as a “priceless and profound gift” and argued that reform was necessary to preserve the integrity of the nation’s immigration system.

Legal experts widely expect the case to reach the U.S. Supreme Court, which would ultimately determine the constitutionality of the executive order.

In the meantime, Judge Coughenour’s ruling prevents federal agencies from enforcing the policy, ensuring that birthright citizenship remains intact for now.

Broader Implications

The legal and political battle over birthright citizenship has reignited a contentious national debate over immigration policy and constitutional interpretation.

With state attorneys general vowing to challenge the order in courts across the country, the issue is poised to remain at the forefront of American politics.

“This is not just about legal arguments—it’s about the fundamental principles of who we are as a nation,” said Attorney General Brown. “And we will fight to protect those principles every step of the way.”

The case now proceeds to further judicial review, as all eyes turn to the Supreme Court for a potential landmark decision.

More articles

- Advertisement -The Fast Track to Earning Income as a Publisher
- Advertisement -The Fast Track to Earning Income as a Publisher
- Advertisement -Top 20 Blogs Lifestyle

Latest article