Lawsuits target Trump’s orders to end birthright citizenship, fire employees | donald trump news

Washington DC – Legal opposition to United States President Donald Trump’s bid for a second term has begun, with rights groups and state governments taking early action against the Republican’s decision on day one to end birthright citizenship.

Late Monday, organizations including the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the Legal Defense Fund filed a lawsuit calling Trump’s actions unconstitutional in a case that is likely to test the limits of his executive power.

On Tuesday, 18 states also filed a similar lawsuit seeking to quash the order.

The filings represent just two of the many legal challenges Trump is facing regarding the record 26 executive orders signed Monday shortly after his inauguration.

In addition to seeking to end birthright citizenship – the policy of granting US citizenship to all people born in the US – Trump has also sought to declare a national emergency at the southern border, roll back federal diversity programs and end federal recognition of transgender identities. Also signed the orders. ,

Those 26 executive orders were among 42 presidential actions taken by Trump on his first day in office, including memos and proclamations, according to White House officials.

In a statement, Cody Wofsey, deputy director of the ACLU’s Immigrant Rights Project, argued that Trump’s decision to target birthright citizenship is contrary to the protections guaranteed under the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

“Birthright citizenship is guaranteed in our Constitution and it is absolutely central to America,” said Wofsey, lead counsel in the ACLU case.

“Denying citizenship to infants born on American soil is illegal, extremely cruel, and contrary to our values ​​as a country.”

Speaking at a press conference on Tuesday, California Attorney General Rob Bonta also criticized Trump for beginning his second term by “eroding one of our country’s fundamental, long-standing rights and disregarding our country’s governing document.” Condemned.

“I have a message for President Trump: I will meet you in court,” Bonta said.

‘The cornerstone of our democracy’

Trump’s order will deny citizenship to children born on US soil to undocumented parents or on temporary work visas. It directs federal government agencies not to issue or accept documents “recognizing United States citizenship” for children born to such parents.

The question concerns the interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment, ratified in 1868. It states that “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States”.

Trump’s executive order argues that people who are born to undocumented parents or who are on temporary visas are not “subject to the jurisdiction” of the US and are therefore excluded from citizenship.

But the ACLU and other rights groups argue that it runs contrary to Supreme Court precedent. In 1898, the Supreme Court ruled that children born in the US to immigrant parents were indeed entitled to US citizenship.

The lawsuit was filed on behalf of three organizations “whose members whose children were born on U.S. soil would be denied citizenship under the order”.

“Birthright citizenship is the cornerstone of our democracy,” said Theo Oshiro, co-executive director of Make the Road New York, one of the plaintiff organizations.

“Our members, who come from all over the world, have built vibrant communities, loving families and built this country for generations. “Denying their children the same basic rights as all other children born in the United States is an affront to the core values ​​of fairness, equality, and inclusivity,” he said.

At a press conference on Tuesday, Bonta also expressed concern that Trump’s order would violate not only the US Constitution but also the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952.

“I want to make it clear that this is not a principled legal disagreement I have with the president,” Bonta said. “If allowed to stand, this order will endanger thousands of American citizens who will be born next year, real children and families who are trying to live their lives in peace.”

Bonta further said, people who are stripped of their US citizenship under this order will lose the ability to work legally in the US, obtain a passport and access other government services.

“The fear, anxiety and trauma that children will be forced to live with under the threat of deportation is extremely damaging to their mental and emotional health,” Bonta said.

DOGE, federal worker action

Lawsuits against executive actions may result in orders being delayed, curtailed, or exceeding the scope of the President’s power. Many actions can only be implemented through Congressional legislation.

In instances where executive orders make their way through lower courts and end up in the U.S. Supreme Court, the resulting decisions may shape constitutional interpretations of the executive branch’s reach.

In addition to the birthright citizenship lawsuit, Trump has also faced challenges to other executive orders he signed on his first day in office. He may face several legal actions in the coming weeks.

For example, late Monday, the National Treasury Employees Union (NTEU) filed a legal challenge to Trump’s order making it easier to fire career employees in the federal government, Bloomberg news agency reports.

In a statement to Bloomberg, NTEU National President Doreen Greenwald alleged that Trump’s order is “about giving a political loyalty test to the everyday employees in the federal workforce who took the oath to uphold the Constitution and serve their country.” Had taken”.

NTEU said this would be a violation of the Civil Service Act.

Another lawsuit, filed by law firm National Security Counsel, alleged that the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), officially created by Trump’s executive order on Monday, violated pre-existing law.

Trump established DOGE as a non-government agency to reduce government bureaucracy and spending. He tapped billionaire Elon Musk to run it.

But the lawsuit claims that DOGE will serve as a government “federal advisory committee” and therefore must follow certain rules related to disclosures and appointments.