Lawsuits target Trump’s orders to end birthright citizenship, lay off workers | News about Donald Trump

Washington, DC – The legal backlash against US President Donald Trump’s second term has begun, with rights groups and state governments firing early fire at the Republican’s first day decision revise citizenship by birth.

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 likely to test the limits of his executive power.

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

The filings represent just two of several legal challenges Trump is set to face to a record 26 executive orders he signed on Monday, shortly after his inauguration.

On top of pushing to end birthright citizenship — the policy of granting US citizenship to all people born in the US — Trump has also signed executive orders declaring a national emergency at the southern border, rolling back federal diversity programs and ending federal recognition of transgender identity.

Towards the White House officialsthose 26 executive orders were among the 42 presidential actions Trump took over his first day, including memos and proclamations.

ua statementCody Wofsy, deputy director of the ACLU’s Immigrant Rights Project, argued that Trump’s decision to target birthright citizenship runs counter to the protections guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment to the US Constitution.

“Birthright citizenship is guaranteed by our Constitution and is absolutely central to what America stands for,” said Wofsy, lead attorney on the ACLU case.

“Denying citizenship to babies born on US soil is illegal, extremely cruel and against our values ​​as a country.”

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

“I have one message for President Trump: I’ll see you in court,” Bonta said.

‘The cornerstone of our democracy’

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

At issue is the interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment, ratified in 1868. It says 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 claims that those born to undocumented parents or those on temporary visas are not “under the jurisdiction” of the US and therefore excluded from citizenship.

But the ACLU and other human rights groups argue that this contradicts Supreme Court precedent. In 1898, the Supreme Court ruled that children born in the US to immigrant parents were in fact entitled to US citizenship.

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

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

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

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

“I want to be clear that this is not some theoretical legal disagreement I have with the president,” Bonta he said. “If allowed to remain in place, this order would endanger thousands of American citizens who will be born in the next year, real children and families who are just trying to live their lives in peace.”

Persons whose US citizenship was revoked under this order, Bonta continued, would lose the possibility of legally working in the US, obtaining passports and accessing other government services.

“The children would be forced to live under the threat of deportation, fear, anxiety and trauma which in itself is enormously detrimental to their mental and emotional well-being,” Bonta said.

DOGE, federal labor actions

Lawsuits against executive actions can result in the order being delayed, curtailed, or declared outside the scope of presidential authority. Many actions can only be enacted through Congressional legislation.

In cases where executive orders make their way through lower courts and end up at the US Supreme Court, the resulting decisions can shape constitutional interpretations of the executive’s reach.

In addition to the birthright citizenship lawsuit, Trump also faced challenges to other executive orders he signed on his first day in office. He is expected to face a series of legal proceedings in the coming weeks.

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

In a statement to Bloomberg, NTEU National President Doreen Greenwald charged that Trump’s order “is about conducting political loyalty tests of everyday employees in the federal workforce who have taken an oath to uphold the Constitution and serve their country.”

This would be a violation of civil service law, the NTEU said.

Another lawsuit filed by the law firm National Security Counselors alleges that the Department of Government Effectiveness (DOGE), officially established by Trump’s executive order on Monday, violated pre-existing law.

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

But the lawsuit claims DOGE will act as the government’s “federal advisory board” and therefore must follow certain rules related to disclosure and employment.