Attorney General Kris Mayes has joined a federal lawsuit challenging President Donald Trump's executive order aimed at ending birthright citizenship in the United States. The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington, is backed by Washington, Oregon, and Illinois. It argues that Trump's order violates both the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and the federal Immigration and Nationality Act.
“No executive order can supersede the United States Constitution and over 150 years of settled law,” stated Attorney General Mayes. She emphasized her commitment to defending constitutional rights alongside other attorneys general.
The legal complaint asserts that Trump lacks authority to alter constitutional provisions regarding citizenship. The 14th Amendment explicitly grants citizenship to all persons born or naturalized in the U.S., a principle also upheld by the Immigration and Nationality Act.
Attorney General Mayes warns that if implemented, this order could deny thousands of Arizona-born children their rightful citizenship, affecting their participation in American society. “Birthright citizenship has allowed America to become the vibrant and dynamic home to families from all corners of this planet,” she said.
Mayes' lawsuit highlights potential harm to Arizona's social programs reliant on federal funding which could face reductions due to changes in citizenship status under Trump's order. Additionally, it poses challenges for voter registration processes which often rely on birth certificates as proof of citizenship.
The history of birthright citizenship traces back to post-Civil War amendments designed to protect citizens' rights regardless of parental status. This was reinforced by the Supreme Court ruling in United States v. Wong Kim Ark (1898), affirming automatic citizenship for those born within U.S. borders.
This longstanding interpretation has been consistently supported by various branches of government over decades, with past legislative attempts deemed unconstitutional by entities such as the Department of Justice’s Office of Legal Counsel.
The lawsuit seeks judicial intervention to prevent any enforcement actions based on what it deems an unconstitutional executive order.