The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has filed a federal lawsuit to block former President Donald Trump’s controversial executive order seeking to end birthright citizenship in the United States. The order, which the ACLU claims strikes at the heart of constitutional protections, aims to deny citizenship to children born in the U.S. to undocumented immigrants or temporary visitors.
The 14th Amendment, adopted after the Civil War, clearly states, “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States.” Trump’s order interprets the phrase “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” to exclude children born to non-citizen parents, a position that legal experts argue contradicts more than a century of established precedent.
The ACLU’s lawsuit, filed in federal court in New Hampshire, argues that the executive order is “unconstitutional and unlawful in its entirety,” asserting that it violates both the Constitution and federal statutes. Anthony Romero, executive director of the ACLU, called the order “a reckless and ruthless repudiation of American values,” warning that it risks creating a “permanent subclass” of individuals born in the U.S. who are denied full citizenship rights.
The executive order, titled “Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship,” directs federal agencies to stop issuing passports, Social Security numbers, and other citizenship documents to children born in the U.S. to undocumented parents or those on temporary visas. It mandates this policy take effect within 30 days of the order.
The ACLU lawsuit highlights the Supreme Court’s landmark 1898 decision in United States v. Wong Kim Ark, which affirmed the principle of birthright citizenship. That case involved a man born in the U.S. to Chinese immigrants who was denied reentry due to discriminatory laws. The suit also emphasizes that the “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” language has historically only excluded children of foreign diplomats.
The legal action was joined by a dozen state attorneys general who filed a parallel lawsuit in Massachusetts. Both cases were strategically filed in jurisdictions within the First Circuit Court of Appeals, known for its Democratic-appointed judges.
The ACLU’s plaintiffs include expecting parents with temporary or uncertain immigration status, such as Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) recipients and asylum seekers. The lawsuit warns that children denied U.S. citizenship under Trump’s order could face severe consequences, including statelessness, loss of access to federal benefits like Medicaid and nutrition assistance, and long-term social and legal vulnerabilities.
Despite the ACLU’s confidence in securing an initial victory, the legal battle is expected to reach the Supreme Court, where a conservative majority could complicate the case. To address this, the ACLU has crafted arguments rooted in “originalist” legal reasoning, emphasizing that birthright citizenship is a fundamental principle with roots in English common law.
Romero acknowledged the challenge posed by the Trump-aligned Supreme Court but remained optimistic. “The overreach of this order is so egregious that we are confident we will ultimately prevail,” he said.
