By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Immigrant rights advocates swiftly filed a nationwide class action lawsuit challenging President Trump’s executive order restricting birthright citizenship. This action was taken in direct response to a Supreme Court decision limiting nationwide injunctions against the order. The lawsuit, filed by the ACLU and other groups, alleges the administration is violating the Constitution, congressional intent, and Supreme Court precedent, seeking protections for affected babies and their parents. Constitutional experts and Rep. Jamie Raskin criticized the Supreme Court’s ruling and predicted the action of public interest groups would be to file a nationwide class action suit. This legal strategy follows the Supreme Court leaving the door open to other avenues to challenge the administration.
Read the original article here
The dust hasn’t even settled on the Supreme Court’s decision, and already, legal groups are mobilizing. A flurry of activity has followed the ruling that limits the scope of nationwide injunctions against President Trump’s immigration orders, and the focus has immediately shifted to a new front: a nationwide class action lawsuit targeting his efforts to restrict birthright citizenship. This is a swift response, and it highlights the resilience of those determined to safeguard constitutional rights.
This lawsuit isn’t a knee-jerk reaction; it’s a strategic pivot. The Supreme Court’s decision, handed down along ideological lines, effectively narrowed the ability of federal judges to issue sweeping injunctions that applied across the entire country. In the wake of that setback, advocates have quickly identified a new legal pathway: the class action lawsuit. This approach allows a group of individuals, in this case, babies potentially affected by Trump’s order, to collectively challenge the policy. The lawsuit alleges that Trump’s actions are unconstitutional, defying the established precedent of the 14th Amendment and congressional intent.
The core of the legal argument rests firmly on the 14th Amendment, a cornerstone of American civil rights law. Enshrined in the Constitution, this amendment includes a crucial clause: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens thereof.” This is the heart of birthright citizenship. It’s a principle that has been affirmed by the Supreme Court in the landmark case *United States v. Wong Kim Ark*, which established that anyone born within the United States is a citizen, regardless of their parents’ citizenship status. The current lawsuit argues that Trump’s order directly contradicts this established legal understanding.
The legal precedent here is crucial. The *Wong Kim Ark* case, dating back over a century, is a key factor in understanding the 14th Amendment. The case involved a man born in San Francisco to Chinese parents. Despite the restrictive Chinese Exclusion Act, the Supreme Court ruled in his favor, firmly establishing the principle of birthright citizenship. This historical context is pivotal, as Trump and his allies have been attempting to overturn this long-standing legal tradition.
The swiftness of this new lawsuit is a clear sign of the challenges ahead. The Supreme Court’s decision, while not explicitly stating that ending birthright citizenship is legal, has created a climate where such actions are more readily pursued. The move to a class action represents a pragmatic adjustment, a way to keep fighting against what is perceived as an unconstitutional overreach of executive power. The ACLU and other advocacy groups are not backing down; they’re adapting and continuing the fight. They see the current legal battleground as essential in protecting the rights of those potentially impacted by Trump’s policies.
It’s also clear that the groups launching the suit recognize that the path ahead will be challenging. The Supreme Court’s recent decision, which essentially limited the power of federal judges, has been met with criticism by constitutional experts. The change could embolden Trump’s administration to pursue more aggressive immigration policies, potentially without facing the same level of legal challenges. The legal groups are prepared for a long and potentially difficult fight.
The potential ramifications of this legal battle extend far beyond the immediate issue of birthright citizenship. The 14th Amendment itself is under scrutiny. It’s more than just the citizenship clause; it also contains the due process clause, the equal protection clause, and the privileges and immunities clause. These clauses form the foundation of many crucial civil rights protections. This lawsuit is one battle in a larger war to safeguard the rights of all people and to ensure the Constitution continues to be the guiding document of this country.