Attorney General Dan Rayfield has announced that Oregon, along with Arizona, Illinois, and Washington, is challenging an executive order issued by President Donald Trump. The order seeks to end birthright citizenship, a move that the states argue violates constitutional rights granted to all children born in the United States.
"The administration’s attempt to sidestep the Fourteenth Amendment is a clear violation of the United States Constitution," stated Attorney General Rayfield. "While the President has every right to issue executive orders during his time in office, that power does not extend to instituting policies that infringe on our constitutional rights."
President Trump's executive order aims to fulfill his promise of ending birthright citizenship. This action allegedly contravenes both the Fourteenth Amendment and Section 1401 of the Immigration and Nationality Act.
To counter this action, Attorney General Rayfield is leading a multi-state lawsuit filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington. The lawsuit seeks to invalidate the executive order and requests immediate injunctive relief through a Temporary Restraining Order.
The filing underscores that birthright citizenship has deep historical roots, dating back before the Civil War. Although it was denied in Dred Scott's Supreme Court decision for descendants of slaves, post-Civil War America adopted the Fourteenth Amendment to ensure citizenship for those born within its borders. Additionally, two Supreme Court decisions have upheld birthright citizenship regardless of parental immigration status.
Oregon's legal filing highlights potential harms from this constitutional shift. It suggests states may lose federal funding for programs like Medicaid and foster care assistance due to changes based on residents' immigration status. Moreover, states would need significant resources and immediate modifications to administer benefits programs under these new rules.
Alongside Oregon, Arizona, Illinois, and Washington are also participating in this legal challenge against what they view as an unconstitutional executive order.