A federal judge in Seattle has issued a temporary restraining order halting the enforcement of President Trump’s executive order restricting birthright citizenship.
U.S. District Judge John Coughenour granted the order on Thursday after hearing arguments from attorneys general representing four Democratic-led states.
Trump’s executive order, which aims to reinterpret the 14th Amendment to limit birthright citizenship to children with at least one U.S. citizen or permanent resident parent, has sparked widespread legal challenges. The policy, a key promise from Trump’s campaign, faces lawsuits from 22 states, two cities, and several other groups, potentially setting the stage for a significant constitutional battle over immigration.
The lawsuit filed by attorneys general from Arizona, Oregon, Washington, and Illinois argues that the policy would unlawfully strip citizenship from approximately 150,000 newborns annually. The plaintiffs contend that the executive order violates federal law and the 14th Amendment, causing irreparable harm by denying affected children their right to full participation in American society.
Meanwhile, in Maryland, U.S. District Judge Deborah Boardman held a pre-hearing conference Thursday regarding a separate challenge brought by two nonprofit groups and five undocumented pregnant women. During the hearing, Department of Justice (DOJ) attorney Brad Rosenberg stated that enforcement of the order would not begin until February 19, as outlined in the order’s provisions.
In Seattle, Judge Coughenour, appointed by President Ronald Reagan, scheduled an in-person hearing for the case on February 5. DOJ attorneys, under new leadership, opposed the temporary restraining order, arguing that immediate relief was unnecessary since enforcement steps had not yet begun.
Trump’s executive order, slated to take effect next month, asserts that children born in the U.S. to undocumented mothers cannot obtain citizenship unless the father is a citizen or lawful permanent resident. The measure has drawn widespread criticism, with opponents arguing that it undermines the constitutional guarantee of birthright citizenship and would result in significant legal and social consequences for affected families.
