New Delhi: A coalition of Democratic-led states and civil rights outfits have filed lawsuits against US President Donald Trump over his proposal to scrap birthright citizenship in the country. The lawsuits were filed within hours of Trump taking office, following his release of a slew of executive orders aimed at significantly changing American immigration policy.
The first two lawsuits were registered by the American Civil Liberties Union, immigrant advocacy outfits, and an expectant mother merely hours after Trump inked the executive order, marking the start of the first major legal wrangle of his administration.
The two other lawsuits were filed by 22 states with Democratic leadership, apart from the District of Columbia and the city of San Francisco, in federal courts in Boston and Seattle. As per the lawsuits, the President had exceeded his authority and breached the US Constitution by attempting to end the automatic grant of citizenship to anyone born on US soil.
According to the office of Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Joy Campbell, if upheld, Trump’s order would be the first to deny citizenship to over 150,000 children born every year in the US. In a statement, she said: “President Trump does not have the authority to take away constitutional rights.”
What is birthright citizenship?
Anyone born in the United States is allowed citizenship at birth, a right established by the Citizenship Clause of the 14th Amendment, which was added to the US Constitution in 1868.
The amendment says: “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 also states the definition of citizens and includes similar language.
The 14th Amendment was granted ratification in 1868, following the four years of the American Civil War, to reverse the effects of the Supreme Court’s Dred Scott v. Sandford decision. The ruling had disallowed African Americans basic rights, declaring that enslaved people were not US citizens and thus were not entitled to protection under federal law or the courts. The 14th Amendment was a significant change, guaranteeing citizenship and equal protection under the law to all people born or naturalised in the United States.
In 1898, the US Supreme Court contended that birthright citizenship extends to the children of immigrants in the case of Wong Kim Ark v. United States. Wong, born to Chinese immigrants in the US, was denied re-entry when he returned from a visit to China. He successfully said that, as a US citizen by birth, his parents’ immigration status did not impact the application of the 14th Amendment to his case. The Court ruled in his favour, reasserting the principle that anyone born on US soil is entitled to citizenship, regardless of their parents’ origins. But the Supreme Court has not yet ruled on whether the Citizenship Clause applies to children born in the US to parents who are in the country illegally.
What does Trump’s executive order propose?
Trump’s executive order pointed out that those born in the United States would not automatically receive citizenship if their mother was in the country illegally and their father was neither a citizen nor a lawful permanent resident. The order also underlined that citizenship would be disallowed to children born to mothers who were in the US legally but temporarily, such as those on student or tourist visas, if the father was not a citizen or lawful permanent resident. Trump has flayed foreign women who travel to the United States with the intention of giving birth, thereby granting US citizenship to their children.
Can Trump’s order scrap birthright citizenship?
Legal experts point out that birthright citizenship cannot be abolished through an executive order, as any attempt would inevitably lead to challenges in the court. It could result in a prolonged legal battles, eventually reaching the US Supreme Court.
“He’s (Trump’s) doing something that’s going to upset a lot of people, but ultimately this will be decided by the courts…,” said Saikrishna Prakash, a constitutional expert and University of Virginia Law School professor, as reported by BBC.
A constitutional amendment could possibly end birthright citizenship, but it would need a two-thirds vote in both the House of Representatives and the Senate, along with nod from three-quarters of US states. At present, Republicans hold a 53-47 majority in the Senate and a 220-215 majority in the House, which means America’s grand old party (GOP) lacks the necessary backing in both chambers to pass such an amendment.
What various lawsuits against Trump’s order contend?
Three of the four lawsuits contesting Trump’s order were filed in Massachusetts and New Hampshire. Any verdicts from judges in those New England states would be reassessed by the Boston-based 1st US Circuit Court of Appeals, which, as per a Reuters report, is the only federal appeals court where all active judges are Democratic appointees.
Four states filed a separate case in Washington state, which falls under the jurisdiction of the San Francisco-based 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals. US District Judge John Coughenour in Seattle will hear the case on Thursday to decide whether to issue a temporary restraining order to prevent the enforcement of Trump’s order. A fifth lawsuit was filed in federal court in Maryland by a group of pregnant women and immigrant rights organisations, including CASA. The lawsuits contend that Trump’s executive order encroaches upon the rights guaranteed by the Citizenship Clause of the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution, which ensures that anyone born in the US is automatically granted citizenship.
