Coughenour’s preliminary injunction prevents the administration from moving forward with the executive order, which was slated to take effect on February 19. The ruling is the latest in a series of legal challenges that have emerged in response to Trump’s plan.
The Executive Order and Its Controversy
The order, titled Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship, sought to redefine the scope of birthright citizenship. It proposed that children born in the U.S. would not automatically gain citizenship if their mothers were undocumented or had temporary legal status. The policy, however, would still grant citizenship if the father were a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident.
This attempt to reshape the Constitution’s interpretation has drawn intense backlash from legal experts, state governments, and advocacy groups, all of whom argue that only a constitutional amendment, not an executive order, can alter such foundational rights.
Legal Challenges Amplify
Four states—Washington, Illinois, Arizona, and Oregon—were the first to bring suit against the administration, accusing Trump of trying to bypass the 14th Amendment and the Immigration and Nationality Act. The case has sparked further legal battles, with immigrant advocacy groups and a coalition of 18 Democratic-led states joining the fight in Massachusetts and Maryland courts.
Judge’s Bold Assertion of Constitutional Principles
Judge Coughenour didn’t hold back in his condemnation of the move, stressing the significance of the Constitution as the “bedrock” of American legal principles. He remarked, “No policy debate or executive order can change the fundamental truth that we are all citizens, subject to the rule of law.”
