In a significant legal development, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has denied an emergency request from the Department of Justice to lift an injunction blocking President Donald Trump’s executive order aimed at ending birthright citizenship for certain children of immigrants. This decision, delivered on February 20, 2025, ensures that the current interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment remains intact, granting citizenship to anyone born on U.S. soil, regardless of their parents’ immigration status.
On his first day back in office, President Trump signed an executive order seeking to deny citizenship to children born in the U.S. whose parents are neither citizens nor lawful permanent residents. This action was part of a broader effort to address what the administration described as a crisis at the southern border and to reform the nation’s immigration system. The order immediately faced legal challenges, with opponents arguing that it violated the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
The executive order has been met with multiple legal challenges across the country. Federal judges in Seattle, Maryland, Massachusetts, and New Hampshire have issued injunctions blocking its implementation. In Seattle, U.S. District Judge John Coughenour ruled that the order was unconstitutional, stating that any change to birthright citizenship must come through a constitutional amendment rather than an executive order. Similarly, Judge Leo Sorokin in Boston emphasized that the Fourteenth Amendment guarantees citizenship to anyone born on U.S. soil, excluding specific exceptions such as children of foreign diplomats.
The Ninth Circuit’s decision to uphold the injunction means that the case will proceed to a more detailed review, with oral arguments scheduled for June 2025. Legal experts anticipate that the issue may ultimately be decided by the U.S. Supreme Court, given its constitutional significance.
Birthright citizenship in the U.S. is rooted in the Fourteenth Amendment, ratified in 1868, which 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.” This principle, known as jus soli or “right of the soil,” has been a cornerstone of American citizenship law for over a century.
While the U.S. is a prominent example, it is not alone in granting birthright citizenship. At least 33 countries worldwide, predominantly in the Americas, offer automatic citizenship to individuals born within their borders. This includes nations like Canada, Mexico, and Argentina. In contrast, many European and Asian countries follow jus sanguinis or “right of blood,” where citizenship is determined by the nationality of one’s parents rather than the place of birth.
Impact on the Latino Community
The Latino community in the U.S. is particularly affected by debates over birthright citizenship. According to data from the Pew Research Center, approximately 250,000 babies were born to unauthorized immigrant parents in the U.S. in 2016, a significant portion of who are of Latino heritage. This represents a 36% decrease from a peak of about 390,000 in 2007.
Changes to birthright citizenship laws could lead to a substantial increase in the number of stateless children, facing challenges in accessing education, healthcare, and legal employment.
Marilyn Hemingway, CEO and President of the Gullah Geechee Chamber of Commerce, has been vocal in her opposition to the executive order. Drawing parallels to historical figures like Joseph Hayne Rainey, the first Black person elected to Congress who supported the Fourteenth Amendment, Hemingway emphasizes the importance of preserving birthright citizenship as a fundamental civil right. She argues that reinterpreting the amendment could undermine the progress made in civil rights and disproportionately impact communities of color.
Critics of birthright citizenship argue that it can be misused by migrants through practices like “birth tourism,” where individuals temporarily enter the U.S. to give birth, securing citizenship for their child. However, studies indicate that such instances are relatively rare compared to the overall number of births in the country. The majority of children born to immigrant parents are part of long-standing communities contributing to the social and economic fabric of the nation.
Timeline for Legal Resolution
Given the constitutional implications, the legal battle over the executive order is expected to be protracted. With oral arguments in the Ninth Circuit scheduled for June 2025, a decision from this appellate court may come later in the year. Regardless of the outcome, it is anticipated that the case will be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. Considering the Court’s docket and the complexity of the issue, a final resolution may not occur until 2026 or later.
The Ninth Circuit’s recent decision underscores the judiciary’s role in interpreting constitutional provisions related to citizenship. As legal proceedings continue, the outcome will have profound implications for immigration policy and the lives of many individuals, particularly within the Latino community. The debate over birthright citizenship touches on fundamental questions about national identity, constitutional rights, and the nation’s commitment to inclusivity.
