Trump signs executive orders on immigration, Jan. 6, TechTalk
President Donald Trump signed a number of executive orders from the Oval Office that addressed a wide range of topics.
Two of the state attorneys general are suing to block the president Donald Trumpattempt to Termination of Birthright Citizenship told USA Today they fear the order will wipe out funding for children’s health care and education.
Eighteen Democratic state attorneys general, led by the state attorneys general for New Jersey, Massachusetts, and California, filed the lawsuit together in Massachusetts federal court on Tuesday.
While unconstitutional in the eyes of the poem Many legal The experts —who say it violates the 14th Amendment—has gotten the most attention, with California Attorney General Rob Bonta and New Jersey Attorney General Matthew Plotkin also worried that many U.S.-born Children will lose federal funding for programs like Medicaid.
“It’s going to have an incredible impact on kids going forward,” Bonta said.
“For the states, this would mean that we would have to absorb the costs of providing health care and education services that are currently paid, in part, by the federal government,” Plotkin said.
Four other Democratic-led states, Washington, Arizona, Illinois and Oregon, have challenged the order in a separate lawsuit in a federal court in Washington state. The judge in the case quickly issued a temporary restraining order preventing the Trump administration from implementing the order on Thursday, calling it “clearly unconstitutional.”
“Obviously, we will appeal to him,” Trump said said Thursday
“The Department of Justice will vigorously defend President Trump’s (executive order), which correctly interprets the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. “We will defend it in full before the court and the American people,” a Justice Department spokeswoman said in a statement. Looking forward to the hearing, eager to enforce our nation’s laws,” a Justice Department spokeswoman said in a statement.
Monday Order States that U.S. citizenship is not automatic for people born in the U.S. when their biological parents are not authorized to remain in the U.S. or have only temporary permission. Beginning in about a month, children born in these circumstances will not be able to receive federal documents that recognize U.S. citizenship, such as passports or Social Security cards.
According to , the new definition is “clearly illegal”. Litigation.
18 states recognized the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, which states that all persons “born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States.” This means that children are US citizens if born in the country regardless of their parents’ immigration status.
“What the president signed is one of the most unusual and unprecedented moves by a president to fundamentally try to rewrite the Constitution,” Plotkin told USA Today.
“The radical left can either choose to swim against the tide and reject the overwhelming will of the people,” Harrison Fields, the White House’s principal deputy press secretary, said in a statement to USA Today. can get on board and work with President Trump to push his wildly popular agenda.”
“This lawsuit is nothing more than an extension of the left’s resistance — and the Trump administration is ready to face them in court,” Fields added.
A poll 9. A Jan. 13 poll by the AP and the University of Chicago’s Norick Center for Public Affairs Research found that nearly 51% of Americans oppose changing the Constitution to end birthright citizenship for these children. Those whose parents do not have the right to remain in the United States, while 28% supported doing so.
Impact on children’s services
The federal government helps states provide many health and education services to children through programs such as Medicaid and the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP). It reimburses states between 50 and 75 percent of Medicaid and CHIP costs for eligible children, according to the lawsuit.
“Not only will (child victims) be ineligible for many public services to which US citizens and even ‘national aliens’ are entitled, but they may be denied access to services for which they are ‘in the country.’ According to the authorities, the grounds of badri and harassment are qualified A memoir Filed by States
Shelley Lapkoff, a senior demographer at the National Demographics Corporation, a demographics research firm, offered some sense of the scale of Trump’s order. A declaration Along with the lawsuits, they estimated that 153,000 U.S. births in 2022 — 4% of all births to U.S. residents — were births in which both parents were not authorized to live in the United States.
Bonta expected 20,000 or more children in California alone to be affected, jeopardizing not only their access to government services and programs, but their future ability to work, vote, The ability to serve on juries, and to run for certain offices, will also be at risk.
“It was an executive order that caused immediate damage,” he said.
‘A Violation of the US Constitution’
According to both Bonta and Plotkin, another reason states are so quick to file their case against Trump’s order on birthright citizenship is that they see their argument as a clear legal winner.
The Attorney General pointed to a Supreme Court decision in 1898 United States of America v. Wang Kim Arkin which the high court ruled that a man born in San Francisco to Chinese parents acquired US citizenship at birth. The court pointed to the 14th Amendment, which was ratified at the end of the Civil War as Congress tried to address the legal status of formerly enslaved people.
The Trump administration is poised to argue that a specific provision within the 14th Amendment does not exclude children of parents who are not authorized permanent residents from citizenship. This clause states that birthright citizenship extends to people born in the United States and “subject to the jurisdiction thereof.”
Hans von Spakowski, a senior legal fellow at the conservative Heritage Foundation, advances this argument more fully, to write That children whose parents are not permanent legal residents of the United States are “subject to the political jurisdiction (and allegiance) of the country of their parents.”
“The fact that tourists or illegal aliens are subject to our laws and to our courts if they violate our laws does not place them within the political ‘jurisdiction’ of the United States as that phrase is defined in the 14th Amendment. The Framers did,” according to von Spakowski.
But the attorney general says that position is clearly outside of how courts and presidential administrations have interpreted the 14th Amendment’s citizenship clause for more than a century. In their lawsuit, they argue that the jurisdictional language in the amendment was intended to exclude those who were exempt from local laws, including tribal members and the children of secretaries of state.
“No president has tried to do this since the Civil War, and so I’m sure the courts will see that this is a clear violation of the Constitution and the laws of this nation,” Plotkin told USA Today. “
Trump has “tried to undo more than 125 years of the United States Supreme Court,” Bonta said. “And so he clearly violated that law. He attacked American citizens. He attacked children. He violated the American Constitution.”
