A New Hampshire federal judge issued a preliminary injunction blocking President Trump’s executive order attempting to end birthright citizenship for children of undocumented or temporarily residing immigrants. The order, targeting a clause within the 14th Amendment, would have denied citizenship documents to these newborns starting February 19th. The judge ruled that the plaintiffs, including community support organizations, would likely suffer irreparable harm if the order proceeded, citing established legal precedent affirming birthright citizenship, such as the Wong Kim Ark Supreme Court case. This injunction follows similar rulings in Washington and Maryland, and the legal battle over the constitutionality of the executive order continues.
Read More
Judge Coughenour granted a preliminary injunction against former President Trump’s executive order attempting to end birthright citizenship, finding the order unconstitutional. The judge’s decision, which blocks enforcement of the order ahead of its February 18th effective date, strongly affirmed the rule of law and rejected the administration’s attempt to amend the Constitution via executive action. He declared that altering birthright citizenship requires a constitutional amendment, not an executive order. This ruling comes from a Reagan-appointed judge, underscoring the bipartisan nature of the legal challenge to the executive order.
Read More
Following arguments from 18 state attorneys general and several cities, a federal judge in Boston is considering a request to block President Trump’s executive order ending birthright citizenship. Plaintiffs contend the order violates the 14th Amendment and would cost states significant funding for essential services. The judge’s decision is pending, but two other federal judges have already issued nationwide injunctions against the order. The core legal dispute centers on the 14th Amendment’s definition of citizenship and the executive branch’s authority to alter it.
Read More
A second federal judge issued a nationwide preliminary injunction against President Trump’s executive order attempting to end birthright citizenship, deeming it likely unconstitutional. The judge’s ruling cites the order’s conflict with the 14th Amendment, established Supreme Court precedent, and contradicts over two centuries of US birthright citizenship practices. The injunction, granted in response to a lawsuit filed by pregnant women and immigrant-rights groups, will remain in effect pending further legal proceedings. The administration is expected to appeal, potentially leading the case to the Supreme Court.
Read More
President Trump’s executive order seeks to overturn the 14th Amendment’s birthright citizenship clause, a cornerstone of American equality established in 1868. This action, challenged in court by multiple states and individuals, is based on a narrow interpretation of the amendment’s “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” clause. Legal experts overwhelmingly disagree with this interpretation, citing established precedent and arguing that the order is unconstitutional and would reverse over a century of legal precedent. The case is expected to reach the Supreme Court, with significant implications for racial justice and the future of American citizenship.
Read More
Phoebe Dong received a 41-month prison sentence for her role in the USA Happy Baby scheme, which facilitated birth tourism for over 100 pregnant Chinese women seeking US citizenship for their children. Dong and her husband, Michael Liu (also sentenced to 41 months), were convicted of conspiracy and money laundering, having coached clients on deceiving US customs officials. Despite Dong’s emotional plea citing her personal experiences and hardships, the judge denied her request to serve her sentence after Liu’s. This case highlights the ongoing debate surrounding birthright citizenship in the United States and forms part of a larger crackdown on birth tourism operations.
Read More
Pregnant women nationwide are leading lawsuits against the federal government, challenging President Trump’s executive order ending birthright citizenship. These suits, filed in Maryland, Massachusetts, and Washington, allege the order is unconstitutional, violating the Fourteenth Amendment’s Citizenship Clause, which has been upheld for over 150 years. Multiple states and cities have joined the legal fight, arguing that the President lacks the authority to unilaterally revoke this established right. The lawsuits contend that the order would render children stateless and deny them fundamental rights.
Read More
President Trump’s executive order aiming to revoke birthright citizenship for children of non-citizen parents has been deemed “blatantly unconstitutional” by a federal judge. The administration’s arguments, relying on 19th-century laws and misinterpretations of Supreme Court cases concerning Native American citizenship, are widely rejected by legal experts. The order’s fate hinges on whether judges prioritize historical precedent, particularly the 1898 *Wong Kim Ark* decision affirming birthright citizenship, or embrace the administration’s revisionist historical claims. Ultimately, the Supreme Court’s decision will reveal its stance on the Trump administration’s actions and its interpretation of constitutional history.
Read More
The Trump administration, in legal filings challenging birthright citizenship, argued that the Fourteenth Amendment’s citizenship clause requires individuals to be “subject to the jurisdiction thereof,” citing the Civil Rights Act of 1866, which excluded “Indians not taxed.” This interpretation, supported by the Supreme Court’s Elk v. Wilkins decision denying citizenship to Native Americans due to tribal allegiance, contends that the government’s connection to children of undocumented immigrants is weaker than its relationship with tribal members. This position represents a significant shift from the government’s previous stance on Native American citizenship.
Read More
A federal judge in Seattle issued a temporary restraining order blocking President Trump’s executive order ending birthright citizenship, deeming it “blatantly unconstitutional.” The order, granted in response to a lawsuit filed by Washington state and other Democratic-led states, halts implementation for 14 days pending further legal proceedings. The judge questioned the legal basis for the executive order, highlighting the potential for significant harm to affected children. The Trump administration argued that the 14th Amendment allows for exclusion of certain children, while the plaintiffs contend the order violates the amendment and will cause substantial financial and logistical burdens on state programs.
Read More
John Q. Hosedrinker