MARYLAND — President Donald Trump has issued an executive order that would significantly alter the interpretation of birthright citizenship under the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
The order seeks to stop granting citizenship to children of undocumented immigrants born on U.S. soil, a move that critics argue undermines the nation's foundational legal principles.
In a statement regarding the executive order, Trump commented, "This next order relates to the definition of birthright citizenship under the 14th amendment of the United States; okay, that’s a good one; birthright—that’s a big one."
He went on to claim that the policy was a necessary correction to what he described as a misinterpretation of the Constitution by the U.S. Supreme Court in the 1857 Dred Scott v. Sandford case, which famously denied citizenship to African Americans.
The executive order, which is set to take effect in 30 days, has ignited widespread legal opposition. Nick Katz, General Counsel for CASA, a community organization that supports working-class Black, Latino, Afro-descendant, Indigenous, and immigrant communities, called the move "a frontal assault on the Constitution."
CASA, along with the Asylum Seeker Advocacy Project (ASAP) and five undocumented immigrants, has filed a lawsuit against Trump and his administration in an effort to block the order.
“Obviously we view this as a frontal assault on the Constitution,” said Katz. “That not only hurts CASA members, it hurts everyone in this country. The Constitution is the backbone of the system of government and what our country is built upon. Although we’re going to bring this suit to protect the interests of our members, it’s much bigger than that.”
The lawsuit, which spans nearly 40 pages, features declarations from several individuals directly affected by the executive order. One of the plaintiffs, referred to as Jane Doe, is an immigrant mother from Prince George’s County who is due to give birth in July 2025.
She already has two daughters who are U.S. citizens and is deeply concerned that her unborn child will be denied citizenship, along with the healthcare and benefits that come with it.
In her declaration, Jane Doe states, "I am afraid that my child won’t have access to healthcare because they won’t be eligible for federal benefits," adding, "I feel it is deeply wrong to subject an innocent newborn to such cruelty."
Another plaintiff, a Jane Doe from Montgomery County, is a mother with a pending asylum claim who has been living in the U.S. with her 12-year-old daughter and unborn child.
She fears that, under the new executive order, her child would be born stateless, without any country to claim citizenship, particularly since she cannot return to Colombia due to safety concerns. "She is worried that her child will be born without a country as a result of the executive order," her declaration states.
Katz emphasized the potential global implications of the order, saying, "You can even have a situation where children are born stateless because they aren’t able to access citizenship from the country or origin of their parents. So if they aren’t considered U.S. citizens, they literally have nowhere to go."
The lawsuit takes aim at the 14th Amendment’s clear language, which has been interpreted for over a century to guarantee citizenship to anyone born on U.S. soil, regardless of their parents' immigration status.
The 14th Amendment states, "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside."
Katz says the organization provides resources and advocacy to marginalized communities and condemned the potential impact of the executive order, saying, "The idea that the president would strip their children of their basic citizen status is just absolutely repugnant to them, and it should be to anyone who thinks about it."
In his executive order, Trump argues that the U.S. is "the only country in the world" that grants birthright citizenship, labeling the practice as "absolutely ridiculous." He also referenced the Dred Scott decision, stating that the order repudiates the "shameful" interpretation of the Constitution in that case.
The new policy is expected to face further legal battles, with other groups, including the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the Maryland state attorneys general, also filing lawsuits in opposition to the change.
Legal experts are already anticipating a lengthy court fight over the matter, with many pointing out that any change to birthright citizenship would require a constitutional amendment—a process that typically takes years and requires broad public and political support.
As the lawsuit moves forward, CASA and its allies are doubling down on their commitment to challenging what they call an unconstitutional attack on immigrant families and vulnerable communities.
“We are acting in their direction by their leadership," Katz said. "These assaults on basic protections like birthright citizenship cannot go unchallenged.”
With the order set to take effect in just 30 days, the nation now awaits the legal proceedings that will ultimately decide the fate of birthright citizenship in America.