Federal Judge Strikes Down Trump’s Controversial Birthright Citizenship Order

A federal judge issued a significant ruling on February 6, affirming that birthright citizenship is a constitutional right. Judge John Coughenor’s decision blocks the Trump administration’s attempt to deny citizenship to children born to individuals who are not legally in the United States.

Coughenor emphasized the clear wording of the Citizenship Clause in the 14th Amendment: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States.” He dismissed claims from the Department of Justice suggesting that this clause was exclusively intended to protect freed slaves and Black Americans.

The judge asserted, “It is one of the precious principles that makes the United States the great nation that it is,” noting that such rights cannot be altered by executive order. Though his ruling is a preliminary injunction, it suggests that the challengers, including Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes, have a strong legal basis for their claims.

Coughenor believed that the administration’s plan could cause “irreparable harm” by denying essential services and medical care to specific children. He extended the injunction nationwide, stating that allowing such discrepancies would create a confusing and unjust situation for various states.

The ruling is consistent with Coughenor’s earlier statements, during which he characterized the government’s legal position as weak and its order as blatantly unconstitutional. This latest action follows a similar ruling from a federal judge in Maryland.

Trump’s original directive aimed to redefine birthright citizenship, suggesting that children born to unlawfully present mothers or non-citizen fathers were “not subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States. This interpretation included cases where the mother was temporarily in the country, further complicating the citizenship rights of children.

Coughenor rejected these arguments, asserting that “subject to the jurisdiction” pertains solely to geographic authority and applies to any child born in U.S. territory, irrespective of parental immigration status. He cited an 1898 Supreme Court ruling that upheld similar principles, outlining that exceptions to birthright citizenship were limited and did not include children born to non-diplomatic adults.

Mayes hailed the ruling as a victory for constitutional law, reinforcing the idea that all individuals born on U.S. soil are entitled to full citizenship rights. This decision may set important legal precedents for future immigration and citizenship discussions.