The Blubber

A federal judge on Thursday temporarily blocked President Donald Trump’s executive order that aimed to end the constitutional guarantee of birthright citizenship, regardless of the immigration status of a child's parents.

U.S. District Judge John C. Coughenour issued the ruling in a case brought by the states of Washington, Arizona, Illinois, and Oregon. These states argue that the 14th Amendment, along with established Supreme Court precedent, firmly upholds the principle of birthright citizenship.

This case is one of five lawsuits filed by 22 states and several immigrant rights organizations nationwide. The suits include personal accounts from attorneys general who are U.S. citizens due to birthright citizenship and from pregnant women who fear their children might be denied citizenship under the executive order.

Trump signed the executive order on his Inauguration Day, with plans for it to take effect on February 19. The measure could affect hundreds of thousands of people born in the U.S., according to one lawsuit. For example, in 2022, approximately 255,000 children were born to mothers living in the U.S. without legal status, and about 153,000 children were born to two such parents, according to data included in the lawsuit filed in Seattle.

The United States is among roughly 30 countries, most in the Americas, that follow the principle of jus soli—"right of the soil"—which grants citizenship to those born within its borders. Both Canada and Mexico also apply this principle.

The lawsuits argue that the 14th Amendment guarantees citizenship to anyone born or naturalized in the U.S. and that this interpretation has been upheld for over a century. Ratified in 1868, the amendment 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."

Trump’s order, however, claims that the children of noncitizens are not "subject to the jurisdiction" of the U.S. and directs federal agencies to deny citizenship to children unless at least one parent is a U.S. citizen.

A pivotal case on birthright citizenship dates back to 1898 when the Supreme Court ruled in favor of Wong Kim Ark, who was born in San Francisco to Chinese immigrants. Despite facing denial of reentry after a trip abroad under the Chinese Exclusion Act, the Court held that Wong was a U.S. citizen because he was born in the country.

Some advocates for stricter immigration policies argue that this ruling applied to children of legal immigrants and question whether it extends to children of parents living in the U.S. without legal status.

The executive order has prompted attorneys general to share personal stories about birthright citizenship. Connecticut Attorney General William Tong, for instance, who is the first Chinese American elected to the position and a U.S. citizen by birthright, described the lawsuit as deeply personal.

“There is no legitimate legal debate on this question. But the fact that Trump is dead wrong will not prevent him from inflicting serious harm right now on American families like my own,” Tong said earlier this week.