ACLU, others sue Trump over birthright citizenship, saying executive order is unconstitutional
A lawsuit to stop President Donald Trump from ending birthright citizenship was filed Monday night — hours after he signed an executive order attempting to gut what has been recognized as a constitutional right for more than 125 years.
The suit, filed at U.S. District Court for New Hampshire, asks that enforcement of the order immediately be halted, stopped permanently, and declared unconstitutional and unlawful.
Until the order, which Trump signed the same day he was inaugurated as the 47th president, the U.S. government has, since at least the late 1800s, considered the child of any immigrant born on U.S. soil an automatic citizen, even to a mother in the United States illegally.
“Birthright citizenship embodies America’s most fundamental promise: that all children born on our soil begin life as full and equal members of our national community, regardless of their parents’ origins, status, or circumstances,” the lawsuit says, adding: “Now, flouting the Constitution’s dictates, statutory commands, and long-standing Supreme Court precedent, Defendant President Donald Trump … attempts to upend one of the most fundamental American constitutional values by denying citizenship to children born on American soil to a mother who is ‘unlawfully present’ or temporarily present, and a father who is not a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident.”
The case was filed by the American Civil Liberties Union and other legal groups on behalf of several plaintiffs, including the groups New Hampshire Indonesian Community Support, League of United Latin American Citizens and Make the Road New York.
Ending birthright citizenship has long been a policy goal of some of those who want stricter immigration laws. Some conservative scholars have argued that the wording of the 14th amendment — saying that citizenship must be granted to those “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States — should exclude born-in-America children of those who aren’t here legally.
That isn’t the consensus of most constitutional scholars, and although the U.S. Supreme Court hasn’t explicitly ruled whether these children are entitled to birthright citizenship, there are similar cases in which the court ruled that those kids are automatically citizens, said retired Cornell Law School professor Stephen W. Yale-Loehr, who coauthored the treatise “Immigration Law & Procedure.”
“Of all of the expected immigration orders,” he said of Trump’s order, “that one is the most likely to be struck down by the courts.”
Trump’s order is called “Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship.” He’s ridiculed birthright citizenship, saying, “it’s ridiculous.”
The order would also end automatic citizenship for those born to mothers temporarily and legally in the U.S., such as the holder of a student, tourist or work visa, unless the father is a lawful permanent resident or a citizen.
A lawsuit to stop President Donald Trump from ending birthright citizenship was filed Monday night — hours after he signed an executive order attempting to gut what has been recognized as a constitutional right for more than 125 years.
The suit, filed at U.S. District Court for New Hampshire, asks that enforcement of the order immediately be halted, stopped permanently, and declared unconstitutional and unlawful.
Until the order, which Trump signed the same day he was inaugurated as the 47th president, the U.S. government has, since at least the late 1800s, considered the child of any immigrant born on U.S. soil an automatic citizen, even to a mother in the United States illegally.
“Birthright citizenship embodies America’s most fundamental promise: that all children born on our soil begin life as full and equal members of our national community, regardless of their parents’ origins, status, or circumstances,” the lawsuit says, adding: “Now, flouting the Constitution’s dictates, statutory commands, and long-standing Supreme Court precedent, Defendant President Donald Trump … attempts to upend one of the most fundamental American constitutional values by denying citizenship to children born on American soil to a mother who is ‘unlawfully present’ or temporarily present, and a father who is not a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident.”
The case was filed by the American Civil Liberties Union and other legal groups on behalf of several plaintiffs, including the groups New Hampshire Indonesian Community Support, League of United Latin American Citizens and Make the Road New York.
Ending birthright citizenship has long been a policy goal of some of those who want stricter immigration laws. Some conservative scholars have argued that the wording of the 14th amendment — saying that citizenship must be granted to those “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States — should exclude born-in-America children of those who aren’t here legally.
That isn’t the consensus of most constitutional scholars, and although the U.S. Supreme Court hasn’t explicitly ruled whether these children are entitled to birthright citizenship, there are similar cases in which the court ruled that those kids are automatically citizens, said retired Cornell Law School professor Stephen W. Yale-Loehr, who coauthored the treatise “Immigration Law & Procedure.”
“Of all of the expected immigration orders,” he said of Trump’s order, “that one is the most likely to be struck down by the courts.”
Trump’s order is called “Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship.” He’s ridiculed birthright citizenship, saying, “it’s ridiculous.”
The order would also end automatic citizenship for those born to mothers temporarily and legally in the U.S., such as the holder of a student, tourist or work visa, unless the father is a lawful permanent resident or a citizen.
Source link
