Skip to comments.
18 States Sue to Stop Trump’s Birthright Citizenship Order
The New York Times ^
| Jan. 21, 2025, 12:53 p.m. ET
| Mattathias Schwartz
Posted on 01/21/2025 11:41:06 AM PST by E. Pluribus Unum
Attorneys general from 18 states sued President Trump on Tuesday to block an executive order that refuses to recognize the U.S.-born children of unauthorized immigrants as citizens, the opening salvo in what promises to be a long legal battle over the Trump administration’s immigration policies.D.C.
The complaint, filed in Federal District Court in Massachusetts was joined by the cities of San Francisco and Washington, D.C.
The states view Mr. Trump’s attempt to limit birthright citizenship as “extraordinary and extreme,” said New Jersey Attorney General Matthew J. Platkin, who led the legal effort along with the attorneys general from California and Massachusetts. “Presidents are powerful, but he is not a king. He cannot rewrite the Constitution with a stroke of the pen.”
On Monday, in the opening hours of his second term as president, Mr. Trump signed an order declaring that future children born to undocumented immigrants would no longer be treated as citizens. The order would extend even to the children of some mothers in the country legally but temporarily, such as foreign students or tourists.
Mr. Trump’s
executive order asserts that the children of such noncitizens are not “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States, and thus aren’t covered by the 14th Amendment’s longstanding constitutional guarantee.
But there are signs the judiciary could be divided on the issue. Judge James C. Ho, who Mr. Trump nominated to…
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Front Page News; Government; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 18traitors; aaronford; alldemocrats; andreacampbell; brookejenkins; california; charityclark; citizenship; colorado; connecticut; dananessel; dc; delaware; domesticenemies; elizabethwalsh; enemieslist; enemyags; foreignagents; hawaii; insurrectionists; jeffjackson; jeremyfeigenbaum; joshkaul; keithellison; lawfare; letitiajames; maine; maryland; massachusetts; mattathiasschwartz; matthewgraves; matthewplatkin; michigan; minnesota; nevada; newmexico; newyork; northcarolina; partyoftreason; peterneronha; philmurphy; philweiser; raidtheirhomes; raidtheiroffices; raultorrez; rhodeisland; robbonta; roundthemup; sanfrancisco; sedition; seditionists; shankarduraiswamy; shefalisaxena; treason; vermont; vivianahanley; washingtondc; williamtong; wisconsin
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 121-129 next last
The Fourteenth Amendment gave the newly liberated slaves U.S. citizenship, but not the Native Americans. Native Americans were given U.S. citizenship by act of Congress, not the Fourteenth Amendment. Illegal aliens cranking out anchor babies do not have superior rights to the Native Americans.
To: E. Pluribus Unum
2
posted on
01/21/2025 11:42:15 AM PST
by
Lurker
( Peaceful coexistence with the Left is not possible. Stop pretending that it is.)
To: E. Pluribus Unum
Why would any state care?
3
posted on
01/21/2025 11:43:01 AM PST
by
BenLurkin
(The above is not a statement of fact. It is either opinion, or satire, or both.)
To: E. Pluribus Unum
The Supreme Court has ruled that constitutional Natural Born Citizens (NBC) must be born to parents who are legally in the U.S.
No per se constitutional “birthright citizenship”. Period.
4
posted on
01/21/2025 11:45:39 AM PST
by
Jim W N
(MAGA by restoring the Gospel of the Grace of Christ (Jude 3) and our Free Constitutional Republic!)
To: E. Pluribus Unum
Which 18 states, so we may know the enemy administrations?
5
posted on
01/21/2025 11:46:05 AM PST
by
Frank Drebin
(And don't ever let me catch you guys in America!)
To: E. Pluribus Unum
A few states forcing all states to shoulder the burden of unconstitutional “birthright citizenship” is a deal breaker.
The era of the “Great Federal Sugar Daddy” are over. We don’t have the money, and neither do these states. They go back. Anchor baby and all. I don’t care what any court says, Americans cannot should the burden of other states irresponsibility any longer, nor should they be forced to do so.
To: Jim W N
Does the President and/or the Supreme Court have authorization to amend the Constitution?
To: BenLurkin
The 18 states are no doubt blue states. More population means more congressmen. Stacking congress.
8
posted on
01/21/2025 11:51:31 AM PST
by
calljack
(Sometimes your worst nightmare is just a start.)
To: E. Pluribus Unum
NO MORE BASTARDIZTION OF THE 14TH AMENDMENT!Original intent of the 14th Amendment
Senator Jacob Howard (served on the Senate Joint Committee on Reconstruction, which drafted the 14th) clearly spelled out the intent of the 14th Amendment by stating:
"Every person born within the limits of the United States, and subject to their jurisdiction, is by virtue of natural law and national law a citizen of the United States. This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the Government of the United States, but will include every other class of persons. It settles the great question of citizenship and removes all doubt as to what persons are or are not citizens of the United States. This has long been a great desideratum in the jurisprudence and legislation of this country."
https://www.14thamendment.us/birthright_citizenship/original_intent.htmlSen. Lyman Trumbull, Chairman of the Judiciary Committee, author of the Thirteenth Amendment, and the one who inserted the phrase (All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and the States wherein they reside):
[T]he provision is, that 'all persons born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens.' That means 'subject to the complete jurisdiction thereof.' What do we mean by 'complete jurisdiction thereof?' Not owing allegiance to anybody else. That is what it means.
Sen. W. Williams:
I understand the words here, 'subject to the jurisdiction of the United States,' to mean fully and completely subject to the jurisdiction of the United States.
https://www.14thamendment.us/articles/anchor_babies_unconstitutionality.htmlSenator Jacob Howard states the intent of the Fourteenth Amendment published in the Congressional Record May 30, 1866.
https://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=llcg&fileName=073/llcg073.db&recNum=11
We have, at a minimum, 3 different Senators who were involved in drafting the 14th Amendment, stating on record in Congress that subject to the jurisdiction can not, does not, apply to foreigners or aliens (even if here legally).
The only thing missing for correcting the wrong introduced in the 1960's, is political will. We must do the right thing, and return to original intent of the 14th!.
9
posted on
01/21/2025 11:52:01 AM PST
by
rxsid
(HOW CAN A NATURAL BORN CITIZEN'S STATUS BE "GOVERNED" BY GREAT BRITAIN? - Leo Donofrio (2009))
To: E. Pluribus Unum
Ignore. Carry on with removals.
10
posted on
01/21/2025 11:52:31 AM PST
by
rktman
(Destroy America from within ? Check! WTH? Enlisted USN 1967 to end up with this💩? 🚫💉! 🇮🇱👍!)
To: Jim W N
Really? That certainly is not common knowledge on Free Republic, considering how many debates there have been on the subject of natural born citizenship over the years.
And many of those debates have discussed how the Supreme Court has never ruled on this.
To: E. Pluribus Unum
Hopefully the fight is over while Trump is in office and his DOJ puts up a real fight for what’s right, with a hopefully sane SCOTUS to decide on it and be done with it.
12
posted on
01/21/2025 11:54:02 AM PST
by
Tell It Right
(1 Thessalonians 5:21 -- Put everything to the test, hold fast to that which is true.)
To: E. Pluribus Unum
All of these states and cities hold Europe in high esteem and think we should be more like Europe. OK, let's follow the European approach to birthright citizenship...
13
posted on
01/21/2025 11:54:14 AM PST
by
ProtectOurFreedom
(They were the FA-est of times, they were the FO-est of times.)
To: Frank Drebin
The states that joined the suit are: California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Rhode Island, Vermont and Wisconsin.
To: E. Pluribus Unum
Sue them back. And start issuing daily EOs, each with slightly different wording, faster than they can issue new lawsuits. This lawfare business must be ended once and for all.
To: Frank Drebin
**Which 18 states, so we may know the enemy administrations?**
6-3 SCOTUS. That’s us.
To: E. Pluribus Unum
DC should have it’s “state” suing ability removed.
Where are the Red states countersuing these 16 states?
17
posted on
01/21/2025 11:57:40 AM PST
by
Jane Long
(Jesus is Lord!)
To: Kathy in OC
Does the President and/or the Supreme Court have authorization to amend the Constitution? No.
The Constitution itself specifies the requirements to amend the Constitution.
The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress
U.S. Const., Art. V.
18
posted on
01/21/2025 11:57:49 AM PST
by
Jim W N
(MAGA by restoring the Gospel of the Grace of Christ (Jude 3) and our Free Constitutional Republic!)
To: Dilbert San Diego
And many of those debates have discussed how the Supreme Court has never ruled on this.
and that is the point. place your bets on the ruling.
19
posted on
01/21/2025 11:57:51 AM PST
by
PeterPrinciple
(Thinking Caps are no longer being issued, but there must be a warehouse full of them somewhere)
To: Lurker
Exactly! Wong Kim Ark was the harmed party in the 1898 case.
20
posted on
01/21/2025 11:58:30 AM PST
by
BigB60
(C. S. Lewis loves hobbits)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 121-129 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson