A federal judge on Thursday temporarily blocked President Donald Trump’s executive order denying U.S. citizenship to the children of parents living in the country illegally, calling it “blatantly unconstitutional” during the first hearing in a multi-state effort challenging the order.
The 14th Amendment of the Constitution promises citizenship to those born on U.S. soil, a measure ratified in 1868 to ensure citizenship for former slaves after the Civil War. But in an effort to curb unlawful immigration, Trump issued the executive order just after being sworn in for his second term on Monday. The order would deny citizenship to those born after February 19 whose parents are in the country illegally. It also forbids U.S. agencies from issuing any document or accepting any state document recognizing citizenship for such children.
Trump’s order drew immediate legal challenges across the country, with at least five lawsuits being brought by 22 states and a number of immigration rights groups. A lawsuit brought by Washington, Arizona, Oregon, and Illinois was the first to get a hearing.
U.S. District Judge John Coughenour, a Ronald Reagan appointee, questioned the Justice Department’s attorney, Brett Shumate, about the order, calling it “blatantly unconstitutional.” Shumate argued that the arguments being made by the Trump administration have never previously been litigated and that there was no reason to issue a 14-day temporary restraining order.
The judge scheduled a hearing on February 6 to decide whether to block the order long-term as the case proceeds.
The U.S. Department of Justice had argued that the order is constitutional, but Judge Coughenour rejected this claim, stating that he “can’t remember another case where the question presented was as clear as this one is.”
The states, along with a number of immigration rights groups, argued that the order would immediately start requiring states to spend millions to revamp healthcare and benefits systems to reconsider an applicant’s citizenship status. Washington Attorney General Nick Brown said that babies are being born today, tomorrow, and every day, and the order would cause harm to hundreds of thousands of citizens nationwide.
The case involving birthright citizenship unfolded in 1898, when the Supreme Court held that Wong Kim Ark, who was born in San Francisco to Chinese immigrants, was a U.S. citizen because he was born in the country. However, some advocates of immigration restrictions have argued that this case clearly applies to children born to parents who are both legal immigrants. They say it’s less clear whether it applies to children born to parents living in the country illegally.
Trump’s order prompted attorneys general to share their personal connections to birthright citizenship. Connecticut Attorney General William Tong, a U.S. citizen by birthright and the nation’s first Chinese American elected attorney general, said the lawsuit was personal for him. He stated that the judge made the right decision and that there is no legitimate legal debate on this question.