Democratic-led states including Michigan wasted no time in filing suit against President Donald Trump, aiming to block his executive order to end near-universal birthright citizenship for children born in the U.S.
Trump’s executive order, which does not go into effect for 30 days, ends automatic citizenship of children born in the U.S. if both parents are in the country illegally or on temporary visas and neither parent is a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident.
The move prompted swift legal action by numerous Democratic-led states, including Michigan. The lawsuit wasn’t a surprise, alleging Trump’s order violates the Constitution’s 14th Amendment as well as Section 1401 of the Immigration and Nationality Act — essentially that being born in the U.S. automatically makes you a citizen.
Within hours of taking office Monday, Trump started signing executive orders in front of a crowd at Capital One Arena and later in the Oval Office, upholding his promise to get tough on immigration, track down criminals who are in the country illegally, and close the southern border.
In an effort to support Trump’s order in the face of legal opposition, House Republicans are planning to introduce a new bill on the issue this week, FOX News reports.
House Science and Technology Committee Chairman Brian Babin, R-Texas, told Fox News Digital that he saw an issue both with people coming over the U.S.-Mexico border illegally and having children here, and wealthier foreigners coming to the U.S. just to have children, colloquially known as “birth tourism.”
“I don’t want anyone saying that I am opposed to immigration,” Babin told Fox News Digital. “My ancestors immigrated as well. I have a daughter-in-law… she is from Brazil, married my son, and she is a proud U.S. citizen. But she did it the legal way. And we cannot continue to have this abuse.”
Go Ad-Free, Get Content, Go Premium Today - $1 Trial
MORE NEWS: Mt. Pleasant Indivisible protest draws 40 — read ‘banned’ books, demand taxpayer funding for PBS
A coalition of Democratic attorneys general maintains the 14th Amendment guarantees that anyone born in the U.S. is considered a legal citizen regardless of their parents’ immigration status.
The lawsuit was filed by attorneys general of 18 states, including Nessel, plus Washington D.C. and the City of San Francisco. The suit requests a preliminary injunction to prevent the order from taking effect on Feb. 19, 30 days after the order was signed.
Trump’s order refuses to recognize the U.S.-born children of unauthorized immigrants as citizens, which proponents support to stop people from entering the country illegally to give birth so they can stay in America.
Legal scholars have started weighing in, saying it’s a legal fight that will likely end up being settled by the Supreme Court. This is just the start of what is bound to be a slew of court battles related to Trump’s immigration policies.
Go Ad-Free, Get Content, Go Premium Today - $1 Trial
“It would go to court, a district court, in all likelihood. And whoever loses will appeal,” Michael Meyerson, a professor at the University of Baltimore Law School, told Baltimore affiliate WBAL-TV. “One of the realities of this, at this moment in American history, is we’re not sure what the Supreme Court will do.”
The U.S. Supreme Court has twice upheld birthright citizenship, regardless of the immigration status of the baby’s parents, according to the court filing.
“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 14th Amendment of the Constitution states.
Trump’s order says the 14th Amendment “has never been interpreted” to automatically grant citizenship to everyone born in the U.S. The new administration takes issue with the phrase, “subject to the jurisdiction thereof,” arguing the amendment does not apply to children whose parents are residing in the U.S. unlawfully or temporarily.
The policy includes a child born to parents in the U.S. on various types of temporary visas, beginning with children born on or after Feb. 19, 2025, when the order is slated to take effect, according to this FAQ by Reddy Neumann Brown, U.S. Business Immigration Attorneys. Any legal challenges could take years for a resolution.
Trump’s controversial order wasn’t a surprise, with states and immigration rights advocates expected to challenge and block many of his immigration policies.
It also isn’t a new fight.
Trump tried immigration deals during his first term, including failed negotiations with Democrats to address the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals crisis and protect undocumented immigrants who arrived in the U.S. as children from deportation, NBC News reports. He maintained he is willing to work on a bipartisan bill to protect Dreamers during a recent “Meet the Press” interview.
Those who support the crackdown on illegal immigration and automatic birthright citizenship want to address national security threats, rein in taxpayer spending on social services, and get some control over America’s immigration policies.
Sen. John Kennedy, R-La., told NBC News he’s “certainly willing to participate” in “a rational discussion” with Democrats on immigration, but he didn’t sound optimistic it would lead to anything substantial.
“The Democratic position, when you drill down to its essentials, is basically: Open the border. And for people who’ve already come in illegally: Give them amnesty. And it’s not acceptable to me,” Kennedy, who sits on the Judiciary Committee that oversees immigration policy, said in an interview.
Perhaps the Democratic-controlled states are most concerned about their budgets. The AG lawsuit claims thousands of children born in the U.S. each year to illegal immigrants will lose access to social services and other state and federal programs.
“They will lose their ability to obtain a Social Security number and, as they age, to work lawfully,” Nessel’s release states. “And they will lose their right to vote, serve on juries, and run for certain offices.”
In addition, this executive order will strip federal funding for programs that the states administer, including Medicaid, Children’s Health Insurance Program, and foster care and adoption assistance programs.