Judge Denies Trump’s Bid to Partially Implement Birthright Citizenship Order

The Trump administration asked the court to ‘stay the injunction’s nationwide application,’ limiting its effect to the plaintiffs in the case.
Judge Denies Trump’s Bid to Partially Implement Birthright Citizenship Order
The District Court of Maryland building in Rockville, Md., on Sept. 13, 2019. Charlotte Cuthbertson/The Epoch Times
Aldgra Fredly
Updated:
0:00

A federal judge in Maryland on Feb. 18 denied President Donald Trump’s motion for a partial stay of a preliminary injunction that blocked an executive order on birthright citizenship from taking effect.

The plaintiffs filed a lawsuit against Trump and other U.S. officials on Jan. 21, alleging that the executive order is unconstitutional, citing Supreme Court precedent, historical context, and statutory protections.
U.S. District Judge Deborah Boardman issued a nationwide preliminary injunction on Feb. 5 in response to the lawsuit filed by the immigrant advocacy group CASA and the Asylum Seeker Advocacy Project (ASAP), as well as five pregnant mothers whose children would be impacted by the executive order. The preliminary injunction temporarily blocked enforcement of the order that would end birthright citizenship for children born to illegal immigrants.
In a five-page order on Feb. 18, Boardman said the defendants have asked the court to “stay the injunction’s nationwide application,” limiting its effect to the plaintiffs in the case and their organizational members.

The judge rejected the request, saying that the nationwide injunction was necessary to maintain “uniform and consistent” citizenship rules across the country.

“Were the Court to limit the injunction to the plaintiffs and the members of the plaintiff organizations, a person’s citizenship status during the pendency of this case would depend on their parents’ decision to bring this lawsuit or their parents’ membership in one of two voluntary, private organizations. That would make no sense,” the judge stated.

Boardman said the defendants also asked the court to only enjoin the enforcement of the executive order and allow the implementation of it so that the Trump administration could begin internal preparations and formulate relevant policies and guidance while the appeal process is ongoing. The judge also denied this request.

Boardman stated that the plaintiffs have demonstrated “a strong likelihood of success” on the merits of their claim that the executive order violates the 14th Amendment of the Constitution, which guarantees the right to citizenship for anyone born in the United States.

The judge acknowledged the president’s authority to issue executive orders but said that the role does not grant the power “to rewrite the Constitution” or ignore “125 years of Supreme Court precedent.”

The White House did not respond to a request for comment by publication time.

Trump’s order on birthright citizenship, issued on Jan. 20, stated that the 14th Amendment’s citizenship clause does not extend citizenship universally to everyone born within the United States.

According to the executive order, the citizenship clause has “always excluded from birthright citizenship persons who were born in the United States but not ‘subject to the jurisdiction thereof.’”

The phrase “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” in the clause excludes an individual if that person’s mother was unlawfully present in the country and the individual’s father was not a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident at the time of his or her birth, the order stated.

The order, initially set to take effect on Feb. 19, also faced legal pushback from multiple states. Eighteen states filed a lawsuit on Jan. 21 challenging the order. Federal judges in New Hampshire, Washington, and Massachusetts also issued preliminary injunctions preventing the federal government from denying birthright citizenship to children of illegal immigrants.

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said last week that the injunctions are unlawful and that the administration will continue fighting the cases.

“These unlawful injunctions are a continuation of the weaponization of justice against President Trump,” Leavitt said in an emailed statement to The Epoch Times on Feb. 14. “The President has every right to exercise his executive authority on behalf of the American people, who gave him a historic mandate to govern on November 5th.”
Aldgra Fredly
Aldgra Fredly
Author
Aldgra Fredly is a freelance writer covering U.S. and Asia Pacific news for The Epoch Times.