766 F.Supp.3d 266
D. Mass.2025Background
- On January 20, 2025, President Trump issued Executive Order 14,160, titled “Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship.”
- The EO directed federal agencies to cease recognizing citizenship for two categories of U.S.-born children: those with fathers who are not citizens or lawful permanent residents (LPRs) and whose mothers are either unlawfully or only temporarily present in the U.S., for births after February 19, 2025.
- Plaintiffs (an individual, two associations, and a coalition of states, DC, and San Francisco) filed lawsuits seeking to enjoin the EO, arguing it violates the Fourteenth Amendment’s Citizenship Clause and parallel statutory provisions.
- Plaintiffs allege the EO would cause widespread harms, including stripping birthright citizenship, loss of federal funds, administrative burdens, and denial of critical services.
- The district court consolidated the two actions and held a hearing to consider the motions for a preliminary injunction.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Standing | Plaintiffs (including states) have direct injury from EO—loss of federal funds, denial of citizenship/services | States lack standing; no particularized injury | Plaintiffs have standing to sue, as harms are direct and redressable |
| Cause of Action | Equitable relief available for constitutional/statutory violations; statutes do not provide exclusive remedy | No valid cause of action under Citizenship Clause/INA | Plaintiffs have valid causes of action for injunctive relief |
| Constitutionality of EO | EO violates Citizenship Clause—birthright citizenship for all born in U.S. regardless of parent status, per Wong Kim Ark | EO excludes children whose parents lack citizenship/LPR status or lawful presence, claiming "subject to jurisdiction" requires more | EO is unconstitutional—Wong Kim Ark and longstanding precedent require birthright citizenship for all but narrow exceptions |
| Preliminary Injunction Standard | Likely success, irreparable harm, balance of equities, & public interest favor injunction | No irreparable harm; public interest in immigration control outweighs | All four factors favor plaintiffs; injunctions granted |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898) (landmark case defining the scope of birthright citizenship under the Fourteenth Amendment)
- Plyler v. Doe, 457 U.S. 202 (1982) (equal protection for children regardless of immigration status)
- INS v. Rios-Pineda, 471 U.S. 444 (1985) (recognizing birthright citizenship for children of undocumented parents)
- Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, 542 U.S. 507 (2004) (birth in the U.S. confers citizenship, regardless of parents’ temporary status)
- Perkins v. Elg, 307 U.S. 325 (1939) (child born in U.S. to foreign nationals is a citizen by birth)