Pres. Trump’s Executive Order Redefining Birthright Citizenship Temporarily Blocked by Federal Judge

A federal judge has blocked President Donald Trump’s (R) Executive Order redefining birthright citizenship.

This comes just days after several lawsuits were filed against the president for allegedly violating the Fourteenth Amendment and federal law by declaring that the children of those who are in the country illegally or temporarily are not guaranteed United States citizenship.

Whether or not the children of illegal aliens, visa-holders, and those with pending asylum claims will automatically become U.S. citizens will depend on how courts — potentially including the U.S. Supreme Court — ultimately interpret the Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

Senior U.S. District Judge John C. Coughenour heard around twenty-five minutes worth of oral arguments Thursday before issuing a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) that prevents President Trump’s the Executive Order from taking effect for fourteen days.

The TRO issued Thursday stems from a lawsuit filed by the states of Washington, Arizona, Illinois, and Oregon, one of five cases brought by twenty-two states — including Maine — and a number of organizations.

[RELATED: Maine AG, ACLU Sue Trump Admin Over Birthright Citizenship for Illegal Aliens]

Trump’s Executive Order — titled Protecting the Meaning and value of American Citizenship — was signed just hours after the inauguration and states that “the privilege of United States citizenship is a priceless and profound gift.”

“The Fourteenth Amendment has never been interpreted to extend citizenship universally to everyone born within the United States,” Trump wrote. “The Fourteenth Amendment has always excluded from birthright citizenship persons who were born in the United State but not ‘subject to the jurisdiction thereof.’”

“That’s a big one,” Trump said as an aide handed him the Executive Order Monday night.

“We’re the only country in the world that does this,” said Trump, referring to America’s longstanding birthright citizenship policies. “It’s ridiculous.”

Although Trump he predicted that legal challenges would come, Trump indicated that he believes his administration is on strong legal footing.

Donald Trump just signed an executive order ending birthright citizenship for illegal immigrants.

This is one of the most important issues he can pick a fight on. It will be challenged immediately, and we need to stand with him every step of the way in this fight. pic.twitter.com/cnAafJcgVC

— Christian Heiens 🏛 (@ChristianHeiens) January 21, 2025

During Thursday’s oral arguments, Judge Coughenour appeared to take a strong stance in opposition to the president’s Executive Order.

When Coughenour first opened the hearing, he reportedly told the Trump Administration’s attorneys that the Executive Order “boggles the mind.”

“This is a blatantly unconstitutional order,” Coughenour later said to Justice Department lawyer Brett Shumate.

“I’ve been on the bench for over four decades,” Coughenour said. “I can’t remember another case where the question presented is as clear as this one.”

Ratified in 1868, the Fourteenth Amendment states: 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.

Currently, the United States grants full citizenship to anyone born on U.S. soil regardless of whether their parents are in the country legally or illegally.

Incorporated into the Constitution in the wake of the Civil War, the Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment was designed to ensure that all formerly enslaved people would be granted citizenship.

By ratifying this amendment, the nation overturned the infamous 1857 Supreme Court ruling in Dred Scott v. Sandford wherein the Justices decided that enslaved people were not United States citizens.

Setting up the modern interpretation of this clause was the Supreme Court ruling in the case of United States v. Wong Kim Ark wherein the citizenship status Wong Kim Ark — who was born in the San Fransisco to parents who were Chinese citizens “living and working “permanently domiciled” in America — was called into question.

Under the Naturalization Act of 1802, Ark’s parents were ineligible to become naturalized citizens, as Congress continued to limit eligibility for naturalization to “free white persons.”

The 6-2 majority opinion in the Wong Kim Ark case, authored by Justice Horace Gray, declared that, under the Fourteenth Amendment, Ark was a United States citizen.

Trump’s Executive Order establishes that “it is the policy of the United States” that citizenship shall not be granted to those whose “mother was unlawfully present in the United States and [whose] father was not a United States citizen or lawful permanent resident at the time of said person’s birth.”

Birthright citizenship would also not be extended to those whose “mother’s presence in the United States was lawful but temporary, and [whose] father was not a United States citizen or lawful permanent resident at the time of said person’s birth.”

This clause of the Executive Order would likely impact the ability of children born to those with pending asylum claims, as well as those who are in the United States on temporary work, student or tourist visas, to obtain birthright citizenship.

As revealed in the Justice Department’s filings for the case out of Washington, the federal government is arguing that the Fourteenth Amendment — and the phrase “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” in particular — has been misinterpreted for the past hundred-plus years.

“Ample historical evidence shows that the children of non-resident aliens are subject to foreign powers — and, thus, are not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States and are not constitutionally entitled to birthright citizenship,” Justice Department attorney Brad Rosenberg reportedly wrote.

In the four-page TRO issued Thursday, Coughenour offered little legal analysis — something to be expected in a ruling of this kind — but instead briefly indicated his belief that the plaintiffs are likely to succeed on the merits and would suffer immediate and irreparable harm if the order were to go into effect while the case winds its way through the courts.

Click Here to Read the Full Ruling

The majority of countries in the western hemisphere recognize birthright citizenship as it has historically been practiced in the United States, but this is not the case worldwide.

Australia, as well as most European, Asian, and African countries, have adopted models similar to that which has been put forward by Trump, largely conditioning a baby’s citizenship on whether or not one or both parents have citizenship or permanent residency in a given country.

It is expected that the challenges against Trump’s Executive Order will eventually be appealed to the Supreme Court, where the nation’s top legal authority will be asked to clearly determine the meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment’s Citizenship Clause as it applies to America today.