| "Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship" | |
 | |
 Front page of Executive Order 14160 | |
| Type | Executive order |
|---|---|
| Number | 14160 |
| President | Donald Trump |
| Signed | January 20, 2025 |
| Federal Register details | |
| Federal Register document number | 2025-02007  |
| Publication date | January 20, 2025 |
| Part ofa series on the |
| Immigration policy of the second Trump administration |
|---|
Targeting of U.S. citizens |
Targeting of immigrants
|
|
Controversies |
Executive Order 14160, titled "Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship", is anexecutive order signed byDonald Trump, the 47th president of the United States, on January 20, 2025. The executive order aims to challenge the prevailing interpretation of theCitizenship Clause of the14th Amendment to the United States Constitution, in order to endbirthright citizenship in the United States for children of unauthorized immigrants as well as immigrants legally but temporarily present in the U.S., such as those on student, work, or tourist visas.
The order was swiftly challenged in court by multiple organizations and states, being blocked by multiple federal judges.
Trump's executive order seeks to redefine how theFourteenth Amendment's clause "and subject to the jurisdiction thereof" should be interpreted.[1]
The executive order states two different situations where a person is no longer a U.S. citizen at birth.[2]
The executive order states that these provisions are only effective for people born 30 days or more after the date of the order; it would have only applied to children born beginning February 19, 2025 had it not been blocked.[2]
After the Supreme Court lifted the block, the order was set to go into effect on July 27, 2025; however, it was again blocked on July 10.[3]
At least ten lawsuits challenging the executive order have been brought by various plaintiffs, including 22 U.S. state attorneys general, civil liberties and immigrants rights groups, and pregnant women.[4][5] As of February 2025[update], four federal judges have issued preliminary injunctions blocking its implementation and enforcement nationwide.[6][5] On March 13, theTrump administration made emergency applications to the Supreme Court, asking it to narrow those court orders.[7] In these appeals, the government argued for its position on birthright citizenship.[8] On April 17, the Supreme Court said it would hear arguments in May.[9]
On January 21,Attorney General of WashingtonNick Brown filed suit against the Trump administration in theUnited States District Court for the Western District of Washington, arguing that the order violates the 14th Amendment and federal immigration law. The lawsuit was joined by Arizona, Oregon, and Illinois.[10][11] It was the first of the lawsuits to get a hearing in court, when on January 23, JudgeJohn C. Coughenour issued a temporary block on the order, calling it "blatantly unconstitutional."[12][13] On February 6, 2025, Coughenour granted apreliminary injunction enjoining enforcement of the order, while accusing Trump of circumventing or ignoring the rule of law for personal or political gain.[6] TheDepartment of Justice appealed the ruling later that day. The appeal will be heard by theCourt of Appeals for the 9th Circuit.[4] On February 19, an appellate panel, the first to make a ruling on the executive order, denied to lift the preliminary injunction on an emergency basis, with the majority citing the unlikelihood of success on the underlying merits, setting the stage for fuller hearings in June 2025, pending an appeal to theSupreme Court.[14]
A second lawsuit was filed in aMaryland federal court by immigrant and asylum-seeker rights groups CASA and the Asylum Seeker Advocacy Project on behalf of five pregnant women.[15] On February 5, US district judgeDeborah Boardman issued a nationwide preliminary injunction, saying the order "conflicts with the plain language of the 14th Amendment, contradicts 125-year old binding Supreme Court precedent and runs counter to our nation's 250-year history of citizenship by birth" and was "likely to be found unconstitutional."[16] Attorneys for the Department of Justice appealed the ruling to theCourt of Appeals for the 4th Circuit on February 11, the second such appeal in cases related to the executive order after the appeal inState of Washington v. Trump.[17]
The executive order was challenged in court by theAmerican Civil Liberties Union and theAsian Law Caucus in the caseNew Hampshire Indonesian Community Support v. Trump.[18] On February 10, JudgeJoseph N. Laplante of theU.S. District Court of New Hampshire became the third federal judge to issue an injunction blocking the order.[19]
On January 21, a lawsuit challenging the order was filed in theUnited States District Court for the District of Massachusetts by eighteenstate attorneys general and the cities of San Francisco and Washington, D.C., led byAttorney General of New JerseyMatthew J. Platkin.[10] On February 13, U.S. district judgeLeo Sorokin became the fourth federal judge to block the executive order, issuing a nationwide preliminary injunction.[20] In the ruling, he wrote that the Constitution "confers birthright citizenship broadly, including to persons within the categories described" by the executive order.[21]
The Supreme Court grantedcertiorari to the three cases involving CASA, Inc., Washington, and New Jersey on April 17, 2025, consolidating them for oral arguments on May 15, 2025. The Supreme Court declined to stay any of the current orders from the lower courts in accepting the case. The case is expected to be limited to the jurisdiction of the federal district courts in placing nationwide injunctions, rather than on the question of the constitutionality of the executive order.[22] C-SPAN requested that the Supreme Court allow it to televise the proceedings,[23] which has never been allowed before;[24] the Court did not do so. On June 27, the Supreme Court ruled that the lower courts could not use injunctions to block the implementation of the orders nationwide so long as court cases regarding the orders remained ongoing, but could only use these injunctions to shield the specific plaintiffs involved in the cases.[25][26]
On November 21, the Supreme Court held a private meeting to decide whether to hear the Trump administration's appeals of the lower court rulings that blocked the executive order.[27] On December 5, the Court agreed to hear the administration's appeals and scheduled oral arguments for the spring of 2026.[28]
Seeing class actions as the best means to challenge the order after the Supreme Court's ruling, the ACLU filed a lawsuit asking the U.S District Court for the District of New Hampshire to grant aclass-wide injunction blocking enforcement upon those who would not qualify for birthright citizenship under the executive order. CASA de Maryland filed a similar motion as well.[29]
On July 10, 2025, Judge Joseph Laplante granted the ACLU's request, certified a class of born and unborn babies who would be deprived of their citizenship per the administration's policy, and issued a preliminary injunction blocking the order from being enforced upon that class.[3]
