SEATTLE – A federal district court judge on Thursday temporarily blocked President Donald Trump’s executive order aimed at limiting birthright citizenship, the first skirmish in what promises to be a protracted legal battle over the new administration’s agenda.
U.S. District Judge John C. Coughenour heard 25 minutes of arguments and then issued a court order blocking the policy from taking effect for 14 days. There will be additional briefing on a preliminary injunction to permanently block the executive order while the case moves forward.
Follow live political coverage here
“I’ve been on the court for more than four decades,” said Coughenour, an appointee of Ronald Reagan. “I can’t remember another case in which the issue raised is as clear as this one. This is a blatantly unconstitutional order.”
The case comes as four states — Washington, Arizona, Illinois and Oregon — attempted to block the order before it takes effect in late February. It is one of five lawsuits filed by Democratic attorneys general and immigrant rights organizations challenging the order, which seeks to limit automatic birthright citizenship to children of U.S. citizens and green card holders, as unconstitutional.
We are waiting to hear from federal government workers. If you are willing to talk to us, please email us at tips@nbcuni.com either contact us through one of these methods.
The 14th Amendment to the Constitution has long been understood to grant automatic citizenship to anyone born on American soil, except the children of foreign diplomats. In response to the 1857 Dred Scott decision of the United States Supreme Court, which held that people descended from slaves were not citizens, the amendment begins with the phrase: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and Subject to their jurisdiction, they are citizens.” of the United States and the State in which they reside.”
“President Trump and the federal government now seek to impose a modern version of Dred Scott,” lawyers representing the four states wrote in a court filing. “But nothing in the Constitution gives the President, federal agencies or anyone else authority to impose conditions on the granting of citizenship to persons born in the United States.”
If implemented, Trump’s order would cause plaintiff states to lose federal funds that support programs like Medicaid and the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP), lawyers argue. In addition to “substantial financial losses,” states would immediately have to bear the burden of modifying the administration of those programs to account for the change, the attorneys added.
“In the absence of a temporary restraining order, children born in the plaintiff states will soon become undocumented, subject to removal or detention, and many of them will be stateless,” the attorneys continued. “They will be denied their right to travel freely and re-enter the United States. They will lose their ability to obtain a Social Security number (SSN) and work legally as they grow older. They will be denied the right to vote, serve on juries, and run for certain offices. And they will be placed in positions of instability and insecurity as part of a new underclass created by the president in the United States.”
In their filings, Justice Department lawyers told Coughenour that the birthright citizenship order is an “integral part” of Trump’s efforts to “address this nation’s broken immigration system and the ongoing crisis at the southern border.” ”.
They argue that not only does Trump have the authority to issue the order, but that states lack standing to sue based on their alleged economic damages.
“A third party, including a state, has no legally cognizable interest in the federal government’s recognition of citizenship of a particular individual, much less economic benefits or burdens that are wholly collateral to citizenship status,” wrote the Department of Justice litigator Brad Rosenberg.
While most of the Justice Department’s presentation focuses on technical arguments about why states can’t sue, Rosenberg previews some of the arguments that could come into play as this and other cases move forward: how, in the opinion from the Department of Justice, courts have incorrectly interpreted the 14th Amendment for more than 100 years.
“Ample historical evidence shows that children of nonresident aliens are subject to foreign powers and therefore are not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States and have no constitutional right to birthright citizenship,” Rosenberg wrote.
Ultimately, the case is likely to be appealed all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. A Justice Department spokesperson said Thursday that it will “vigorously defend President Trump’s executive order, which correctly interprets the 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution. We look forward to presenting a full merits argument to the Court and the American people.”
