A coalition of 22 Democratic-led states, along with the District of Columbia and city governments in San Francisco and Boston, initiated lawsuits in federal court aiming to block President Trump's recent executive order aimed at ending birthright citizenship for children of undocumented immigrants. This legal action comes swiftly after Trump's controversial executive order was signed on January 20, marking the first significant legal push against his administration’s immigration policies.

The executive order directs federal agencies to cease acknowledging U.S. citizenship for children born in the United States to mothers residing illegally or temporarily in the country, causing a stir among civil rights advocates who argue that the order undermines the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which guarantees citizenship to all individuals born on U.S. soil. New Jersey Attorney General Matthew Platkin emphasized that "the president cannot, with a stroke of a pen, write the 14th Amendment out of existence," highlighting the gravity of the order's implications for more than 150,000 children born in the United States annually who could be denied citizenship if the order is enforced.

The lawsuits assert that Trump's executive action is a blatant violation of constitutional rights and cite judicial precedents, including the 1898 Supreme Court case United States v. Wong Kim Ark, which affirmed that children born in the U.S. to non-citizen parents are entitled to citizenship. Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Joy Campbell stated, “President Trump does not have the authority to take away constitutional rights,” as she and other state leaders prepared for extended litigation to challenge the enforcement of this order.

Furthermore, the legal response from the coalition of states and civil liberties organizations such as the American Civil Liberties Union involved immediate lawsuits from advocacy groups and immigrant rights activists, highlighting cases of individuals negatively impacted by the proposed policy changes. One plaintiff, cited as "O. Doe," a mother-to-be under temporary protected status, articulated the personal stakes involved, as did other plaintiffs who fear the loss of citizenship for their future children.

This wave of litigation signifies a growing resistance to Trump's immigration agenda, coalescing Democratic state attorneys general in what they characterize as a crucial battle to protect residents' rights. According to The Guardian, Platkin remarked that this immediate legal action sends a clear signal to the Trump administration regarding their commitment to uphold constitutional protections for all individuals within their states.

Legal experts predict that any rulings issued in these cases, most of which were filed in Massachusetts and New Hampshire, will be subject to review by the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which presently comprises judges appointed by Democratic presidents—raising the stakes for the Trump administration as it navigates this turbulent judicial landscape.

As the lawsuits unfold, they will shine a light on the complexities of immigration policy and the long-standing tradition of birthright citizenship in the United States, a right many view as fundamental to the nation’s identity.

For more on this developing story, follow updates from Reuters, AP News, and VOA News.