Court Rejects Trump’s Attempt to Abolish Birthright Citizenship, Calls It ‘Blatantly Unconstitutional’

In a searing rebuke of an executive order issued by President Donald Trump, a federal judge on Thursday temporarily blocked the administration’s attempt to end birthright citizenship, calling the move “blatantly unconstitutional.”

Judge John Coughenour, a Reagan appointee with over four decades on the bench, delivered the ruling in Seattle, granting a temporary restraining order requested by Washington state and three other Democratic-led states. The emergency order halts the implementation of Trump’s policy for 14 days while further legal proceedings unfold.

“I’ve been on the bench for over four decades,” Coughenour stated. “I can’t remember another case where the question presented was as clear. Where were the lawyers when the decision to sign the executive order was made?” The judge remarked that it “boggled” his mind that any legal professional would consider the order constitutional.

The executive order, which sought to strip citizenship from children born in the U.S. to undocumented immigrants and others without permanent legal status, has been widely criticized as a violation of the 14th Amendment. That amendment guarantees citizenship to all individuals born on U.S. soil, provided they are “subject to the jurisdiction thereof.”

Lane Polozola, an attorney representing the state of Washington, emphasized the urgency of the situation during the court hearing. “Babies are being born today here, and in the plaintiff states and around the country, with a cloud cast over their citizenship,” Polozola argued. He warned of the long-term harm facing children denied citizenship under the order, noting, “Births cannot be paused while the court considers this case.”

Read Also: MURIC clarifies position of Shariah panels in South-West

Polozola accused the Trump administration of deliberately ignoring the devastating impacts of its policy, suggesting the harm “appears to be the purpose” of the executive order.

The Democratic-led states, which include Washington, argue that the order would place a significant burden on state programs, both financially and logistically. Without birthright citizenship, children born under the policy would lose access to federal benefits they would otherwise be entitled to, forcing states to pick up the slack.

The Trump administration, represented by Justice Department attorney Brett Shumate, defended the order by interpreting the 14th Amendment’s jurisdiction clause as giving the president authority to exclude certain groups of children from citizenship.

“Imminent harm is not as clear as the plaintiffs suggest,” Shumate argued, urging the judge to hold off on issuing an emergency order until more briefings could be submitted. “I understand your concerns,” he added, but he cautioned against what he called “a snap judgment on the merits.”

Despite the administration’s request for more time, Coughenour found the constitutional arguments against the executive order to be compelling and unambiguous.

The ruling comes amid widespread backlash from immigration advocates, constitutional scholars, and state governments, who warn that ending birthright citizenship could fundamentally alter the fabric of American society.

“Children born here have always been citizens, no matter the status of their parents. That’s what the 14th Amendment guarantees,” Washington Attorney General Nick Brown said in a statement after the ruling. “This order not only harms families but directly contradicts the values that define our nation.”

The policy’s potential fallout extends beyond the affected families. Democratic states argue that denying citizenship to U.S.-born children would create an underclass of stateless individuals, unable to access critical services or participate fully in society.

At the White House, Trump remained defiant. “We’re going to fight this all the way,” he told reporters on Thursday, doubling down on his administration’s commitment to challenging the court’s ruling.

While the temporary restraining order halts the implementation of the policy for now, the legal battle is far from over. Over the next two weeks, both sides will submit additional briefings, with the possibility of the case moving toward the Supreme Court.

For now, Judge Coughenour’s ruling has provided a reprieve for families and states grappling with the implications of Trump’s controversial executive order. Yet, as the case moves forward, the stakes remain high.

Can the constitutional guarantees of citizenship withstand modern political pressures? And what does this legal showdown mean for the future of American identity? The nation—and the world—will be watching closely.