A legal battle has commenced following the filing of a lawsuit by the American Civil Liberties Union, immigrant organizations, and an expectant mother against former President Donald Trump's executive order on birthright citizenship. The lawsuit was filed mere hours after Trump signed the contentious order. The plaintiffs contend that the executive order contravenes the citizenship clause of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which unequivocally grants citizenship to anyone born in the United States.
The executive order in question would impact over 150,000 children born annually in the U.S., as stated by the Massachusetts attorney general's office. This order aims to deny U.S. citizenship to children born in the country, a move that has sparked widespread criticism and legal challenges. The plaintiffs point to the 1898 U.S. Supreme Court ruling in United States v. Wong Kim Ark, which affirmed that children born in the U.S. to non-citizen parents are entitled to citizenship.
The lawsuit was lodged in federal courts located in Boston and Concord, New Hampshire. A coalition comprising 22 Democratic-led states, the District of Columbia, and the city of San Francisco initiated a separate lawsuit in Boston's federal court on Tuesday. These lawsuits assert that Trump's executive order blatantly violates constitutional provisions.
Among the plaintiffs is a Massachusetts resident referred to as "O Doe," who is residing in the country under temporary protected status and is due to give birth in March. Temporary protected status is extended to individuals from countries beset by natural disasters, armed conflicts, or other extraordinary circumstances. Presently, over one million people from 17 nations are under this status.
Legal experts argue that any judicial determinations made by Massachusetts and New Hampshire judges will undergo review by the Boston-based 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. Notably, all five active federal judges in this circuit are appointees of Democratic presidents, which adds another layer of complexity to the unfolding legal proceedings.
The National Treasury Employees Union has also filed a lawsuit against another executive order signed by Trump, which facilitates the firing of federal agency employees to replace them with political loyalists. This legal action underscores a broader challenge against a series of executive orders perceived as overreaching.
Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Joy Campbell emphasized the constitutional implications of the executive order, stating:
"President Trump does not have the authority to take away constitutional rights." – Andrea Joy Campbell
Similarly, Matthew Platkin, a state attorney general, underscored the preparedness of state attorneys general to challenge such actions, asserting:
"State attorneys general have been preparing for illegal actions like this one, and today’s immediate lawsuit sends a clear message to the Trump administration that we will stand up for our residents and their basic constitutional rights," – Matthew Platkin