A recent ruling by a federal judge has put a pause on a controversial executive order regarding birthright citizenship.
According to the Daily Caller, Judge John Coughenour declared the directive from President Trump, which sought to redefine birthright citizenship, unconstitutional and halted its immediate implementation.
The executive order, officially titled "Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship," was issued by President Trump shortly after he assumed office. It proposed that the Fourteenth Amendment does not guarantee citizenship to every child born on U.S. soil, contrary to long-standing practice.
President Trump's stance is that the amendment does not apply universally, suggesting some born in the U.S. are not automatically citizens if they are not "subject to the jurisdiction thereof."
However, this view faced strong opposition. U.S. District Court Judge John Coughenour, appointed by President Ronald Reagan, called the executive order "blatantly unconstitutional." His decision cited potential constitutional conflicts and serious impacts on states and individuals who would be affected by the change.
Immediately after its issuance, the executive order was challenged by several states including Washington, Oregon, Arizona, and Illinois, spearheaded by Democratic attorneys general and supported by various liberal organizations. They argued the directive would cause chaos, forcing states to shoulder enormous costs and lose vital federal funding.
This judicial intervention was within days of the executive order's scheduled effect on Thursday, thus preventing immediate changes to citizenship policy.
Judge Coughenour’s experience and perspective played a crucial role in the judgment. Speaking about his decades of service, he expressed astonishment at the arguments presented in favor of the executive order:
"I’ve been on the bench for over 4 decades. I can’t remember another case where the question presented is as clear as this one. This is a blatantly unconstitutional order."
The ruling also outlined the broader repercussions of the attempted policy shift. In one lawsuit led by New Jersey, it was highlighted that over 153,000 children born to noncitizen parents in 2022 would have faced uncertain citizenship status under the new rule.
The opposition to the executive order was notable not only for its legal challenges but also for the breadth of its support across states and advocacy groups, reflecting widespread concern over the implications of such a fundamental change to American citizenship laws.
Considering the extensive negative effects outlined by the judge, the directive was deemed to run counter to both the constitutional text and the essential principles underlying American rights to citizenship.
Reflecting on the order, Judge John Coughenour also articulated a stern critique of its legal foundation, pointing out the puzzling confidence with which it was defended: I have difficulty understanding how a member of the bar could state unequivocally that is a constitutional order. It boggles my mind.
As it stands, the injunction serves as a significant pushback against what has been perceived as an attempt to significantly alter the framework of American citizenship without thorough constitutional support. The block currently prevents any immediate implementation of the changes proposed by President Trump, thus maintaining the status quo regarding birthright citizenship.