On Monday, a third federal judge ruled against President Donald Trump’s executive order that sought to end birthright citizenship for the children of individuals residing in the U.S. unlawfully.
The decision by U.S. District Judge Joseph N. Laplante in New Hampshire follows similar rulings last week from judges in Seattle and Maryland.
The American Civil Liberties Union, which filed the lawsuit, argues that Trump’s order goes against the Constitution and “attempts to upend one of the most fundamental American constitutional values.”
The Trump administration has claimed that children born to noncitizens are not “subject to the jurisdiction” of the U.S., and as such, do not qualify for citizenship.
The administration is currently appealing the Seattle judge’s decision that blocked Trump’s executive order.
Central to the lawsuits in all three cases is the 14th Amendment, ratified in 1868 after the Civil War and the Dred Scott Supreme Court decision, which ruled that Scott, an enslaved man, was not a citizen despite residing in a state where slavery was abolished.
In 1898, in the landmark case United States v. Wong Kim Ark, the Supreme Court determined that the only children who do not automatically gain U.S. citizenship at birth are those born to foreign diplomats, those born to enemies present during wartime occupation, children born aboard foreign vessels, and those born to members of independent Native American tribes.
The U.S. is one of approximately 30 nations that practice birthright citizenship, or jus soli, a principle that grants citizenship based on the location of birth. Most of these countries are in the Americas, with Canada and Mexico being notable examples.
{Matzav.com}
