The states have filed suit over Trump's push to eliminate a longstanding right.
President Donald Trump's bid to cut off birthright citizenship is a "flagrantly unlawful attempt to strip hundreds of thousands American-born children of their citizenship based on their parentage," attorneys for 18 states, the city of San Francisco and the District of Columbia said Tuesday in a lawsuit challenging the president's executive order signed just hours after he was sworn in Monday.
The lawsuit, filed by 18 Democratic attorneys general, accuses Trump of seeking to eliminate a "well-established and longstanding Constitutional principle" by executive fiat.
"The President has no authority to rewrite or nullify a constitutional amendment or duly enacted statute. Nor is he empowered by any other source of law to limit who receives United States citizenship at birth," the lawsuit said.
Four additional states filed a similar suit later in the day, asking a federal court to keep the executive order from being implemented or enforced, bringing the total number of states to 22.
Trump's order directed federal agencies -- starting next month -- to stop issuing citizenship documents to U.S.-born children of undocumented mothers or mothers in the country on temporary visas, if the father is not a U.S. citizen or permanent resident.
According to the lawsuit filed by the 18 states, about 150,000 children born each year to two parents who are noncitizens and lack legal status could lose access to basic health care, foster care, and early interventions for infants, toddlers, and students with disabilities.
"They will all be deportable, and many will be stateless," the lawsuit said.
President Donald Trump next to Vice President J.D. Vance and First Lady Melania Trump, gives two thumb's up during the inaugural parade inside Capital One Arena, in Washington, D.C., Jan. 20, 2025. Jim Watson/AFP via Getty Images
The states warned the executive order would also cause them to lose federal funding for programs that render services to children regardless of their immigration status.
While Trump's order purports to unilaterally end birthright citizenship, only the U.S. Supreme Court can determine how the 14th Amendment applies.
"President Trump's attempt to unilaterally end birthright citizenship is a flagrant violation of our Constitution," said New Jersey Attorney General Matthew Platkin at a press conference Tuesday. "For more than 150 years, our country has followed the same basic rule: babies who are born in this country are American citizens.
"He's entitled to enact a policy that he sees fit for the country," but "this is an extreme and unprecedented act," Platkin said. ""This isn't just an attack on the law. It's an attack on the very fabric of this nation."
"Presidents in this country have broad power. But they are not kings," said Platklin.
"The great promise of our nation is that everyone born here is a citizen of the United States, able to achieve the American dream," said New York Attorney General Letitia James. "This fundamental right to birthright citizenship, rooted in the 14th Amendment and born from the ashes of slavery, is a cornerstone of our nation's commitment to justice."
"We are ready to take on the challenges of a second Trump administration to ensure that in California our progress will continue, and that our progress will prevail," California Attorney General Rob Bonta said.
The states are seeking to invalidate Trump's executive order and stop any actions taken to implement it. Their lawsuit requests a preliminary injunction to immediately prevent the order from taking effect.
Nonprofit groups in Massachusetts and New Hampshire also filed federal lawsuits challenging the executive order on Monday.
ABC News' Alex Stone contributed to this report.
Ra_In on January 21st, 2025 at 18:53 UTC »
A few thoughts:
The lawsuit specifically mentions how children denied citizenship under this EO would likely end up stateless
There are states and cities that allow mothers to anonymously abandon their newborns in designated locations. If this EO were allowed to take effect as-is, would that mean these children have indeterminate citizenship?
While this EO is written to direct federal agencies to re-interpret the 14th amendment like this only for children born more than 30 days from when it was signed, if SCOTUS actually upheld the order, such a deadline would make no sense. A ruling in Trump's favor would mean the 14th amendment never applied to people born to parents who lack citizenship or permanent residency.
While this EO is too extreme even for this SCOTUS, I wouldn't put it past them to reject it in a way that lets Trump try again (similar to the Muslim ban from his first term).
despitegirls on January 21st, 2025 at 18:35 UTC »
Took too long to find the states but the end of this article lists them: https://www.wric.com/news/politics/ap-trump-signed-an-order-to-end-birthright-citizenship-what-is-it-and-what-does-that-mean/
AudibleNod on January 21st, 2025 at 18:23 UTC »
President Trump also fired immigration court officials. The intended effect is immigrants are left in legal limbo while their cases are left in a massive backlog. Furthermore, he wants detention camps. Meaning he wants to lock up every person suspected of violating immigration law from participating to the US economy while awaiting a final deportation order.