Hundreds gathered outside the U.S. Supreme Court on May 15, 2025, to protest the Trump administration’s effort to strip birthright citizenship from the Constitution. (Photo by Ashley Murray/States Newsroom)
WASHINGTON — A federal judge in the District of Columbia on Thursday seemed weary of the Trump administration’s arguments that it should be allowed to proceed with its second attempt to redefine the constitutional right to birthright citizenship.
During the hearing, Judge Christopher Reid Cooper pressed Department of Justice attorneys to clarify when the second executive order went into effect, because no date was included when President Donald Trump signed his executive order in August.
Cooper also questioned the advocacy groups that brought the suit, led by the American Civil Liberties Union, if he should make a decision on whether to grant a preliminary injunction or wait, as he was concerned about issuing a ruling that would be redundant because there is a similar case out of Maryland. He noted that the judge who handled the first challenge to the president’s executive order in 2025 was also presiding over the second attempt and had more knowledge about the issue.
This is the Trump administration’s second try at curbing birthright citizenship. In June, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down the president’s executive order that would deny citizenship to babies born to parents who were either in the United States on a temporary visa or were immigrants without legal status.
The case was brought by the ACLU, ACLU of New Hampshire, ACLU of Maine, ACLU of Massachusetts, ACLU of the District of Columbia, Legal Defense Fund, Asian Law Caucus and Democracy Defenders Fund. They are representing immigrants and their children who could be subject to the new executive order, and the groups previously challenged the first executive order relating to birthright citizenship.
Trump’s recent executive orders would deny citizenship to babies born in the United States to parents deemed part of a designated terrorist organization and to parents who purposefully came to the United States to gain citizenship in what critics call “birth tourism.”
The executive order also aimed to deny citizenship to children born to foreign diplomatic staff and children born in U.S. territories where Congress has not passed a law granting citizenship.
Passports potentially revoked?
Cooper, who was appointed by former President Barack Obama, wanted to know when children would be subject to the second executive order, which Trump signed on August 6.
Lucia Goin, an ACLU staff attorney, said there is concern that the second executive order is retroactive and that children who were issued passports would have them revoked by the State Department if the order went into effect.
She added that the order does not have a set date, compared to the first executive order that made clear that any child born 30 days after the order was signed would be subject to it.
Ty Turley Trejo, a DOJ attorney, said the Trump administration views the order as going into effect when it’s published.
Cooper questioned if that meant a child who was born before the Aug. 6 order was published, such as on Aug. 4, would be subject to the order.
Trejo said the executive order would not apply to the newborn, or any child born before the executive order was signed.
Cooper said if he decided to proceed with the case, he would issue an order soon.