President Donald Trump faces a wave of lawsuits challenging his executive order to curtail birthright citizenship. Democratic-led states, civil rights organizations, and advocacy groups filed multiple lawsuits on Tuesday, asserting the policy violates the U.S. Constitution’s 14th Amendment.
Trump’s executive order, signed on Monday, directs U.S. agencies to deny citizenship to children born on U.S. soil if neither parent is a U.S. citizen or legal permanent resident. The lawsuits, filed in federal courts in Massachusetts, Washington state, and New Hampshire, claim the policy undermines the Citizenship Clause of the 14th Amendment, which guarantees citizenship to anyone born in the United States.
Twenty-two Democratic-led states, the District of Columbia, and the city of San Francisco launched two lawsuits, one in Boston and another in Seattle. These suits argue Trump’s policy would strip citizenship from over 150,000 children annually, depriving them of basic constitutional protections and access to federal programs like Medicaid.
“President Trump does not have the authority to take away constitutional rights,” said Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Joy Campbell.
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), immigrant rights groups, and an expectant mother in Massachusetts identified as "O. Doe" also filed similar lawsuits. O. Doe, currently in the U.S. under temporary protected status, is due to give birth in March and argues the policy directly threatens her child’s rights.
New Jersey Attorney General Matthew Platkin emphasized the importance of the legal challenges. “Today’s immediate lawsuit sends a clear message to the Trump administration that we will stand up for our residents and their basic constitutional rights,” he said.
Birthright citizenship, a cornerstone of U.S. constitutional law, grants citizenship to anyone born on U.S. soil, regardless of their parents' immigration status. This principle originates from the 14th Amendment, ratified in 1868, which states: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.”
The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 further codified this constitutional guarantee, affirming that children born in the United States are citizens by birth.
The leading case on birthright citizenship is the 1898 U.S. Supreme Court ruling in United States v. Wong Kim Ark. The Court held that a man born in San Francisco to lawful Chinese immigrant parents was a U.S. citizen, despite restrictive immigration laws targeting Chinese nationals.
The Court has also addressed exceptions to this rule. In an 1884 decision concerning voter registration, the Court found that John Elk, born into a Native American tribe, was not a U.S. citizen because he was not "subject to the jurisdiction" of the United States. Congress later resolved this issue by granting citizenship to Native Americans in 1924. Additionally, children born in the U.S. to foreign diplomats with immunity are not considered citizens, as they are not subject to U.S. jurisdiction.
Notably, the Supreme Court has never explicitly ruled on whether the Citizenship Clause applies to children born to undocumented immigrants.
The debate over birthright citizenship resurfaced with President Donald Trump's executive order, which seeks to deny citizenship to U.S.-born children of individuals who are neither citizens nor lawful permanent residents. Trump's order also targets children born to parents lawfully in the country temporarily, such as those on tourist or student visas.
Opponents argue that Trump's interpretation conflicts with established legal principles. While some scholars support limiting birthright citizenship, most constitutional experts dismiss these claims, noting that individuals in the country unlawfully are subject to U.S. laws and, therefore, meet the jurisdiction requirement outlined in the 14th Amendment.
The lawsuits cite the 1898 U.S. Supreme Court ruling in United States v. Wong Kim Ark, which upheld the citizenship of children born in the U.S. to non-citizen parents. Plaintiffs argue Trump’s policy defies this binding precedent and oversteps executive authority.
