Breaking Birthright Citizenship order blocked by Judge

[malaise]

Says he has never seen anything so blatantly unconstitutional.
Fuck you Donvict

A federal judge in Seattle on Thursday temporarily blocked President Donald Trump’s executive order seeking to end birthright citizenship.

U.S. District Court Judge John Coughenour’s ruling in a case brought by Washington and three other states is the first in what is sure to be a long legal fight over the order’s constitutionality.

Coughenour called the order “blatantly unconstitutional.”

“I have difficulty understanding how a member of the bar could state unequivocally that is a constitutional order,” the judge told the Trump administration’s attorney. “It boggles my mind.”

Coughenour’s decision came after 25 minutes of arguments between attorneys for Washington state and the Department of Justice.

https://washingtonstatestandard.com/2025/01/23/judge-grants-was-request-to-block-trumps-birthright-citizenship-order/

Bwaaaah for the judge

Add

[Wounded Bear]

1. Good news, but any deets? nt

[malaise]

2. Here

https://washingtonstatestandard.com/2025/01/23/judge-grants-was-request-to-block-trumps-birthright-citizenship-order/

A federal judge in Seattle on Thursday temporarily blocked President Donald Trump’s executive order seeking to end birthright citizenship.

U.S. District Court Judge John Coughenour’s ruling in a case brought by Washington and three other states is the first in what is sure to be a long legal fight over the order’s constitutionality.

Coughenour called the order “blatantly unconstitutional.”

“I have difficulty understanding how a member of the bar could state unequivocally that is a constitutional order,” the judge told the Trump administration’s attorney. “It boggles my mind.”

Coughenour’s decision came after 25 minutes of arguments between attorneys for Washington state and the Department of Justice.

[Wounded Bear]

3. Thanks. I never doubt your veracity myself, but the board has standards...

[malaise]

4. The link was 8 minutes old

This just broke😀

[Wounded Bear]

5. Nice to see my home state is on the front line of this one...

Was a little worried when our state AG moved up to the Governor's office, but the new guy seems right on the ball with this one.

[malaise]

6. Isn't that Ari's home state as well?

This evening should be good

[Wounded Bear]

7. Ari Melber? Never heard that, but I don't follow celebrity bios much...nt

[malaise]

8. Yep

😀

[malaise]

29. Here's why I discovered that

Melber grew up in Seattle, where he went to Garfield High School, which also turned out musical icons Jimi Hendrix and Quincy Jones years before he got there 😀

[spike jones]

46. off topic- Jimi Hendrix statue Seattle.

https://www.musiclipse.com/2023/11/13/jimi-hendrixs-bronze-statue-a-legacy-immortalized-in-seattle/

[malaise]

47. Seriously sweet

Thanks 😀

[intrepidity]

9. Gah what does this part mean?

Here we go again down the rabbit hole of parsing words and phrases that previously never merited such scrutiny. This mf'er is just so exhausting.

The 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution codified birthright citizenship in 1868. It begins: “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.”

The executive order focuses on the “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” phrase.

“The Fourteenth Amendment has never been interpreted to extend citizenship universally to everyone born within the United States,” Trump’s order reads. “The Fourteenth Amendment has always excluded from birthright citizenship persons who were born in the United States but not ‘subject to the jurisdiction thereof.’”

[Wounded Bear]

14. Current interpretations and precedents say...

that that clause is referring to foreign diplomats and/or children born of foreign military occupyiing US territory.

Dating back to 1898, at least, the 14th has always referred to babies born here, regardless of the citizenship status of their parents, other than the exceptions above.

[text bolded by me]

[Midwestern Democrat]

78. Agreed - illegal aliens are certainly subject to the jurisdiction of the US - they don't enjoy diplomatic immunity -

if they commit a crime here, they go to prison - they don't get to just board a plane back to their home country and get off scott free.

[SunSeeker]

23. I agree with the judge, I can't believe a member of the bar made that argument.

If DOJ is now claiming babies born to noncitizens are not subject to the jurisdiction of the US, then how can they deport them?

[malaise]

28. The judge laughed that out of the court

Has no meaning

[Kingofalldems]

10. Yep.

https://bsky.app/profile/rpsagainsttrump.bsky.social/post/3lggknnarzk2e

[TheBlackAdder]

36. Sanction that attorney.

[LeftInTX]

11. Yes, but Trump will appeal. This could go all the way to SCOTUS.

As a matter of fact, there is a good chance it will.

[Frank D. Lincoln]

18. Every now and then SCOTUS actually does the right thing.

In this instance I hope they either:

1.) Refuse to hear the case. Or

2.) Uphold birthright citizenship.

But, of course, I'm worried.

[LeftInTX]

20. I know what Clarence and Alito will do!

Unlike Roe V Wade, this has inherent constitutional support. Also overturning birthright citizenship will create an upheaval. It will be very costly in terms of the infrastructure required to implement a new system than what we already have. So from a practical standpoint, Roberts will likely uphold birthright citizenship, simply because overturning it would be chaotic.

But I'm also worried too.

[Frank D. Lincoln]

25. I sure hope you're right, LeftInTX. nt

[Dem4life1234]

54. Goodness we wouldn't have to worry about this

Had people voted in Hillary so she could nominate justices who honored the Constitution.

[sdfernando]

64. So if orangeanus succeeds would they take away citizenship from said persons???

Wouldn't that include all anchor babies???...including "usha" the very very very second woman?

[ShazzieB]

40. Of course Trump will appeal.

Duh, that's what he always does with any legal decision he doesn't like! But this is still good news! At the very least, this and the virtual avalanche of other lawsuits that are still coming will prevent this garbage order from being put into effect for some period of time.

As far as SCOTUS is concerned, we don't yet know how far the Sinister Six will be willing to go. For all we know, there may be a line somewhere that even they won't cross, and this could it. I think it's a bit presumptuous to assume that we can predict what they will do with absolute certainty. In the meantime, the country has been given a.reprieve, and that is very good news indeed.

[Wiz Imp]

49. The SCOTUS will NOT back Trump on this.

This is such a black and white case not even open to interpretation, that as the Judge here said, there is absolutely no legitimate legal argument to support Trump's order.

Note that for those who thing that the SCOTUS will rubber stamp Trump every time, they actually ruled against him 4 times in the past couple weeks.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/132256811

[C_U_L8R]

12. Without corrupt lawyers, they'd be no Trump.

[FakeNoose]

13. All federal judges should be objecting to this awful E.O. regardless of politics

Chump has blatantly overstepped his authority. He can't rewrite the Constitution, and all federal judges including the conservative ones MUST understand that. I'm waiting for a groundswell of protest from the entire judicial branch.

Thank you Judge Coughenour! I'm sure you won't be alone on this.

[Ray Bruns]

15. I have difficulty understanding how a member of the bar could state unequivocally that is a constitutional order,"

The judge must not have ever met a MAGA lawyer.

[pandr32]

16. Excellent, and I really like "Donvict"!

[malaise]

48. Stole it from another DUer

😀

[pandr32]

56. It deserves use!

[spooky3]

17. Wow! Thanks for posting this. nt

[malaise]

32. YW!

Hey you 😀

[aggiesal]

19. Meirda47 administration's attorney will be fired for not making a strong enough argument ...

to keep this judge from making a sound and reasoned opinion.

[spanone]

21. Dear Judge, meet 'President' Blatantly Unconstitutional.

[totodeinhere]

22. Trump's order was made knowing that it would be blocked by the courts.

Last edited Thu Jan 23, 2025, 05:12 PM - Edit history (1)

That was the whole idea. They wanted to get it into the federal court system with the expectation that it would eventually work its way to the SCOTUS. And then there is hope that the MAGA judges on the Court will uphold it. So people in this thread saying that the judge's order is good news don't really understand what is going on here.

[SunSeeker]

26. Everyone here understands this is going to SCOTUS. Spare us the condescension.

The good news we are celebrating is how quickly it was blocked (at least for now) and the judge's magnificently strong rebuke, not only of the argument, but the corrupt DOJ attorneys making it.

The only thing that would have made it better is if Rule 11 sanctions were orderered.

[malaise]

33. I dare the SC judge who adopted two children from Ireland to declare birthright citizenship

unconstitutional.

[totodeinhere]

58. I don't think that even this SCOTUS will find that order constitutional.

But then I didn't think they would ever overturn Roe v Wade either. So we shall see.

[Skittles]

76. it's also theater for the sick cult

[totodeinhere]

80. Yes. And many members of his cult are so stupid that they

will think that this makes a real difference. But of course we know it won't.

[NBachers]

24. Department of Justice *GAG* Usually, I have an impulse of respect when I think of the Department of Justice - not now.

[cilla4progress]

27. We are all

mind-boggled.

So, now I suppose this judge is on a MAGA hit list?

[CaliforniaPeggy]

30. Way to go, U.S. District Court Judge John Coughenour! Well done, and quickly too. nt

[moonshinegnomie]

31. id like to see the lawyers arguing for the order disbarred

[malaise]

34. THIS

Rec

[Hekate]

35. KICK

[malaise]

39. He attacked the judge

and says he’s not surprised

[VMA131Marine]

37. The bill that has been proposed

is unconstitutional too. The only way to change birthright citizenship is a constitutional amendment.

[FBaggins]

52. Not entirely true

Congress has the power to legislate in their domain. “Subject to the jurisdiction thereof” is not remarkably clear - so they could pass clarifying language. Then it would be up to a court to decide whether it clarifies or contradicts

[malaise]

59. Thank you

Rec

[VMA131Marine]

60. Well, except ...

SCOTUS basically defined “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” in Wong Kim Ark. So any bill that strays from that is likely to be unconstitutional. The exceptions laid out by SCOTUS in that case are incredibly narrow for good reason. If someone is not subject to U.S. jurisdiction they aren’t subject to U.S. law either. Talk about unintended consequences if that happens.

[FBaggins]

68. Not really - he was born almost a decade before the Chinese Exclusion Act

Prior to 1882 - there were differences in whether and how immigrants could become citizens… but there weren’t any “illegal aliens” because that was the first law restricting who was allowed to be here.

And even then - it was not as simple as “born here - you’re a citizen”. Particularly with this court - I could see deferring to Congress (though likely not POTUS) on who is subject to the jurisdiction of the US.

[VMA131Marine]

69. Sigh ...

SCOTUS found that the only exceptions to the phrase “under the jurisdiction thereof” were the children of diplomats and the children of soldiers of invading armies. Given that there hasn’t been an invasion of the continental U.S. since Santa Anna in 1836, the last category is essential moot. So, if you were born in the U.S. and not the child of a diplomat, Wong Kim Ark says you’re a natural born citizen. It has nothing to do with when Kim was born.

The Chinese Exclusion act was about stopping Chinese immigration to the United States, initially for a period of 10 years and later extended. SCOTUS also referenced the act in its Wong Kim Ark ruling and explicitly said it did not exclude Kim from citizenship.

[DallasNE]

79. Diplomatic Corp

That "jurisdiction" language is to exempt children of foreign diplomats having children in this countrythat the children are not eligible for American citizenship even though they would otherwise meet the criteria.

[VMA131Marine]

81. That's why I said the exceptions to "under the jurisdiction"

SCOTUS laid out are incredibly narrow. Besides the children of diplomats, the only other enumerated exceptions are the children of soldiers of an occupying army. That’s not a category that has had much relevance since the decision since the only parts of the U.S. to be occupied since Wong Kim Ark are Guam, Wake Island, and some other Pacific islands during WWII.

[ancianita]

74. Seriously? Courts have to duke out the jurisdiction of "All persons born..."?

Congress can't legislate anything that conflicts with constitutional amendment even in their domain; taking it to court will be a waste of yet another court's time.

“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.”

The exceptions would be the babies of diplomats? vacationing Russians?

[Daleuhlmann]

38. Bravo, Judge Coughenour 👍!

There is no question that this executive order is unconstitutional! Besides. removing birthright ctizenship would take a Constitutional Amendment ratified by all fifty states, a highly unlikely prospect. I'm sure that Dummy Donald had already been informed of that fact, but what does s convicted felon snd an adjudicated sexual offender care about the law anyway?

[malaise]

41. Tell Donvict

And welcome to DU😀

[calimary]

63. Well, the donald might not care.

But the rest of us do.

[republianmushroom]

42. Damn, someone still believes in the constitution.

[malaise]

43. Are you watching his lying press conference right now

This fucker is sick.
Even M$NBComcast just cut him off.

[republianmushroom]

45. No, don't watch the news on TV.

[Dem4life1234]

55. He's a sick POS criminal who isn't fit for the presidency

People say he's senile, but he is simply evil and spiteful.
He gets a kick out of making people miserable.

[republianmushroom]

62. Who, the judge ?

The judge that blocked trump EO still believes in the constitution. We all know trump does not, nor the supreme court.

[Dem4life1234]

70. No trump I meant

[republianmushroom]

65. Who are you talking about ?

U.S. District Court Judge John Coughenour or someone else ?

[Dem4life1234]

71. The orange one

[3825-87867]

44. HOWEVER!

Since Scotus said he can do what he wants, even worse, he can simply remove them to The Trump Concentration Camps, arrest them or...worse... then worry about fighting it in court!
We're sorry but we can't seem to find those citizens! But they'll look...hard!
Think it can't be done? This guy want to be King so badly...
Immunity, Idiocy and Insanity.

[William769]

50. It is unconstitutional

I believe the Supreme court will see it that way also. I believe there are some lines they will not cross.

[malaise]

53. I agree

Rec

[Dem4life1234]

51. I pray

I pray this never goes through, this is literally part of the Constitution!


Why don't they just create a safe borders bill, oh wait, they voted against that.

Vindictive human beings!

[AZJonnie]

57. However, while this is (entirely ridiculously) a subject of litigation

ICE agents (and who knows, probably military) will be fanning out looking for 'illegals'. Currently a child born in the US cannot be deported. But if his/her parents lack citizenship, the parent(s) can be. That's always been the case. It just was often not done. Now, it will be, and when the parents are rounded up, the ICE agents will tell the children 'your citizenship may not be real anymore, so you better just leave with your parents we're shipping out!'. Meanwhile his minions in the Congress will work on ways to make it difficult for those kids to come back to the US after their citizenship has been affirmed by the courts. Then THOSE laws will be in the courts for years.

And at least as importantly to him, while litigation is ongoing, the less undocumented people will purposefully come and have children here. Which does, in fact, happen. Basically Trump can get a fair bit of what he wants here, even by losing on this EO in the end. The longer the court cases goes on, the more young immigrant citizens will end up willingly leaving, and the fewer will end up being born here.

On edit: Oh, and one more thought. Someone, somewhere, some agency or office I assume is in charge of 'determining/documenting which people are US citizens', right? Assuming that's a federal position Trump controls, he simply tells that office that they're not to 'officially record' any newborn as a citizen unless >0 parents prove they are here 'legally'. Then that's a whole other court case and it's plausible that nobody's specifically wrote a law to account for a POTUS being such a dick as this. If people aren't 'documented' as citizens, they effectively are not.

[sueroseus]

66. Coming to America pregnant, then returning to Russia with new baby and American birth certificate.

A few years ago I read about wealthy Russian women who came to the U.S., stayed in Trump properties and had ther babies; then returned to Russia. See: (google)

Wealthy Russians are flocking to give birth at Trump's luxury US ...

[AZJonnie]

67. Personally I don't need to google because I remember reading the story quite well

And you are spot on. Trump properties in FL were famous as short term rentals for drive-thru Russian births.

If I'm honest, I'm not entirely moored to the idea that unconditional birthright citizenship is the only moral path going forward. The US is actually relatively uncommon in this practice in the modern world. But if it's to be changed, it needs to be done constitutionally, and the resulting law must be logical, fair, and cannot be racist in nature. And OBVIOUSLY it must not retroactively change any living person's citizenship status.

[Jacson6]

61. Good! Now I won't be deported because my maternal ancestors came here before the USA ever existed.

I'd hate to go back to England 255 years after my ancestors left.

Trump is not a genius for signing this executive order.

[Six117]

72. That thing infesting the Oval Office is glaringly, blatantly unconstitutional.

Nt

[Mountainguy]

73. John Coughenour was a Reagan appointment as well.

[kelly1mm]

77. As expected by everyone, even the Trump administration. All a set up to get it to the SCOTUS. nt