In a significant setback for President Donald Trump, a federal appeals court has rejected his attempt to terminate birthright citizenship through an executive order, as The Hill reports.
This ruling by the First Circuit Court of Appeals in Boston upholds a lower court’s injunction, marking another legal challenge to Trump’s broader immigration policy initiatives since his return to office.
The controversy began in January when President Trump issued an executive order aimed at restricting birthright citizenship, a principle enshrined in the U.S. Constitution’s 14th Amendment.
This order sought to alter the long-standing tradition that grants citizenship to anyone born on U.S. soil, regardless of their parents’ status.
The move sparked immediate backlash, leading to legal challenges from multiple states and advocacy groups.
Among the challengers was California Attorney General Rob Bonta, who, alongside 19 other states, filed a lawsuit to block the President’s directive.
In June, a district court issued an injunction against the executive order, preventing its enforcement while the legal battle continued.
Since then, four other federal courts have similarly ruled against the policy, citing concerns over its legality and alignment with constitutional principles.
The First Circuit Court of Appeals in Boston became the fifth court to oppose the order, affirming the district court’s injunction with a decisive ruling.
The appeals court’s decision emphasized that ending birthright citizenship through executive action is likely unlawful and contrary to established American values.
In its ruling, the court noted, “The ‘lessons of history’ thus give us every reason to be wary of now blessing this most recent effort to break with our established tradition of recognizing birthright citizenship and to make citizenship depend on the actions of one’s parents rather than -- in all but the rarest of circumstances -- the simple fact of being born in the United States.”
The court’s top judge added, “Our nation’s history of efforts to restrict birthright citizenship -- from Dred Scott in the decade before the Civil War to the attempted justification for the enforcement of the Chinese Exclusion Act in Wong Kim Ark -- has not been a proud one.”
Bonta hailed the decision as a victory for constitutional rights.
The state AG stated, “Today’s decision upholds a nationwide injunction in our lawsuit challenging the President’s attempt to end, with the stroke of a pen, the constitutional right to birthright citizenship.”
He further declared, “We will continue to oppose this executive order until the President’s attempt to unmake the Constitution is blocked completely.”
Amid these legal defeats, the Department of Justice took action late last month by requesting the U.S. Supreme Court to examine the constitutionality of Trump’s executive order.
This request signals the administration’s intent to escalate the fight over birthright citizenship to the nation’s highest court.
The outcome of this potential Supreme Court review could have far-reaching implications for immigration policy and the interpretation of constitutional rights in the United States.