On January 23, 2025, U.S. District Judge John Coughenour issued a temporary restraining order against President Donald Trump’s executive order that sought to end birthright citizenship. The judge labeled the order as “blatantly unconstitutional,” referencing the 14th Amendment, which guarantees citizenship to all individuals born on U.S. soil.
Background on the Executive Order
Signed on January 20, 2025, the executive order titled “Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship” aimed to redefine the Citizenship Clause of the 14th Amendment. Specifically, it sought to deny citizenship to children born in the U.S. whose parents are neither citizens nor lawful permanent residents. The order was set to take effect on February 19, 2025, and would have impacted future births, not retroactively affect existing citizens.
Legal Challenges and the Court’s Ruling
The executive order faced immediate legal challenges from multiple states and civil rights organizations. In a lawsuit filed by Washington, Arizona, Illinois, and Oregon, the plaintiffs argued that the order violated the 14th Amendment. Judge Coughenour, appointed by President Ronald Reagan, agreed with this assessment, stating that the order was “blatantly unconstitutional.” He emphasized the clarity of the constitutional guarantee and expressed surprise that such an order was issued.
Implications of the Ruling
The temporary restraining order halts the implementation of the executive order for 14 days, allowing for further legal proceedings. This pause ensures that children born in the U.S. during this period will continue to receive citizenship as guaranteed by the 14th Amendment. The ruling also underscores the judiciary’s role in upholding constitutional protections against executive actions that may overstep legal boundaries.
Reactions and Future Outlook
President Trump has indicated plans to appeal the ruling, maintaining that the executive order is within his authority. Meanwhile, civil rights groups and several states have lauded the court’s decision as a victory for constitutional rights and the protection of immigrant communities. As legal battles continue, the nation watches closely, recognizing the profound implications for immigration policy and the interpretation of constitutional citizenship rights.
