President Donald Trump signed an executive order a couple of weeks ago, titled “Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship,” aiming to end birthright citizenship for children born in the United States to non-citizen parents.
The Jan. 20 order seeks to reinterpret the 14th Amendment’s Citizenship Clause, excluding individuals born to parents who are undocumented immigrants or temporary visa holders from automatic U.S. citizenship. The policy is set to take effect on Feb. 19.
In response, Maryland Attorney General Anthony Brown and Washington, D.C., Attorney General Brian Schwalb have joined a coalition of 18 states in filing a lawsuit against the executive order. The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts, argues that the order violates the 14th Amendment and exceeds presidential authority. The plaintiffs contend that any attempt to alter the interpretation of the 14th Amendment must go through Congress or a constitutional amendment, rather than an executive order.
Attorney General Brown strongly condemned the executive action in a press release issued by his office.
He emphasized the historical and constitutional significance of birthright citizenship.
“Birthright citizenship is a right enshrined in our Constitution. It is a reflection of our country’s ideals—a belief that every baby born on U.S. soil is a member of our great nation and deserves to play a part in its future,” he said.
Brown also criticized the executive order as “un-American,” vowing that his office would vigorously challenge what he called a “blatantly unconstitutional decision” in court.
The 14th Amendment, ratified in 1868, states that “all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States.”
Proponents of the executive order claim that the original intent of the 14th Amendment was to grant citizenship to freed slaves, not to extend it to the children of foreign nationals.
However, other Democratic attorneys argue that the plain text of the amendment has been historically interpreted to grant citizenship to all individuals born on U.S. soil, regardless of their parents’ immigration status.
In a press conference, California Attorney General Rob Bonta described Trump’s order as “a terrifying tone to set for his second term,” adding, “I have one message for President Trump: I’ll see you in court.”
Similarly, New Jersey Attorney General Matthew Platkin, in an interview with NPR, emphasized that birthright citizenship is “enshrined in our [U.S.] Constitution for a reason.”
Schwalb also condemned the executive order highlighting its impact on local residents.
“The administration’s sweeping action, along with its efforts to clarify, has created widespread confusion and fear among many residents of the District, particularly regarding their health and safety,” Schwalb told WUSA9.
The legal battle over birthright citizenship is expected to escalate to the Supreme Court, where justices will decide the constitutionality of Trump’s order.
In the meantime, Maryland, D.C. and other states involved in the lawsuit are preparing to preserve birthright citizenship.
As the case unfolds, its outcome could have lasting implications for immigration policy, constitutional law and the lives of millions of individuals born in the United States.
For now, some state attorneys general remain firm in their commitment to challenging what they said is an unprecedented and unconstitutional attack on the rights of U.S. born children.
The executive order has also prompted immediate legal challenges from civil rights organizations.
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) filed a lawsuit arguing that the order is unconstitutional and will cause significant harm to children born to non-citizen parents.
The ACLU’s Executive Director, Anthony D. Romero said, “Birthright citizenship is the principle that every baby born in the United States is a U.S. citizen. The Constitution’s 14th Amendment guarantees the citizenship of all children born in the United States (with the extremely narrow exception of children of foreign diplomats) regardless of race, color or ancestry.”
Copy edited by Camiryn Stepteau
