Latest news with #ACLUImmigrants'RightsProject
Miami Herald
14-05-2025
- Politics
- Miami Herald
Nationwide or nowhere? Supreme Court weighs power to block Trump's citizenship crackdown
The Supreme Court will hear oral arguments on Thursday in a case that will help frame President Donald Trump's power to end automatic citizenship for children born in the United States whose parents didn't enter the country legally. The emergency appeal hearing stems from a January executive order signed by the president and blocked by a trio of federal judges in Washington state, Maryland and Massachusetts. The high court is not expected to rule directly on the constitutionality of the 14th Amendment, with justices focused instead on the reach of judicial restraints and whether lower courts hold the authority to issue nationwide injunctions that apply across the entire country. But the core of the challenge centers on a long-established American value of how citizenship is attained. 'The government's essentially saying, 'We want to be able to deny babies the citizenship that is guaranteed in the constitution even though we're not prepared to actually make the case that we're going to win.' And that makes sense, because they've lost for every single court below,' said Cody Wofsy, deputy director for the ACLU Immigrants' Rights Project, whose organization helped file the legal challenge. The 14th Amendment The principle that nearly anyone born on U.S. soil is automatically a citizen has been a settled interpretation of the 14th Amendment for more than 150 years. The 14th Amendment's citizenship clause states: 'All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.' Trump has called that reading of the law 'ridiculous,' and his executive order argues that the amendment does not require citizenship for children of undocumented immigrants or temporary visa holders and that its application has deviated greatly from the original intentions. If the court green-lights the president's order, federal agencies would stop issuing documents like Social Security cards and passports to children born to non-citizens. Stephen Miller, a White House deputy chief of staff and architect of Trump's immigration policy, has described a scenario in which an undocumented immigrant comes into the country while pregnant, allowing the family to gain residency and access to a plethora of benefits. Miller argues that incentive is the primary catalyst for illegal immigration into the country, a problem that overwhelmed the Biden administration and was an impetus for Trump's return to the White House. 'Birthright citizenship represents the largest and most expensive scam in financial history,' Miller said during an April appearance on Newsmax. Multiple federal judges have found that the president cannot unilaterally alter the Constitution's clear language through executive order alone. The high court is tasked with considering whether these federal judges have the power to issue sweeping injunctions that block executive actions for the entire country, or whether such rulings should be limited only to the plaintiffs in a given case or specific jurisdiction. Trump administration attorneys have asked the court to narrow judicial injunctions, leaving the executive order in place elsewhere while litigation continues. But supporters of nationwide injunctions argue that piecemeal enforcement of citizenship rules would create chaos and confusion, while undermining a fundamental right. 'Are we really like weeks away from North Carolina and South Carolina having different citizenship laws?,' asked Todd Schulte, President of a progressive group organizing opposition to the order. 'People who are building their lives here, they have kids ... we're going to have different citizenship goals? It would be a terrible, harmful outcome, even temporarily.' Support for birthright citizenship is sharply divided by party: 76% of Democrats support automatic citizenship for all U.S.-born children, compared to 54% of Independents and 26% of Republicans, according to a YouGov poll conducted in January and February. Far-reaching effects Research suggests that ending birthright citizenship would have far-reaching demographic effects. According to projections from the Migration Policy Institute and Penn State's Population Research Institute, repealing birthright citizenship could increase the unauthorized immigrant population by millions over the coming decades, as children born in the U.S. would no longer automatically become citizens. Each year, roughly 255,000 children could be born without U.S. citizenship, creating a growing population of stateless residents, according to the data. Trump has falsely claimed that the United States is the only country in the world that offers birthright citizenship. In fact, three-dozen countries grant similar citizenship status, including Argentina, Colombia, Cuba, El Salvador, Nicaragua and Venezuela. The case, Donald J. Trump, et al. v. CASA, et al., could reshape the balance of power between the executive branch and the courts, with implications for further lawsuits, particularly if the high court chooses to limit the lower court injunctions to certain states. A ruling in the case is expected by late June or early July before the court recesses for summer.
Yahoo
04-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Immigrant advocates sue Florida over new immigration crackdown law
Immigrant advocates are suing Florida legal officials, questioning the constitutionality of a part of the state's new laws to crack down on illegal immigration. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Florida, ACLU Immigrants' Rights Project and Americans for Immigrant Justice filed a lawsuit this week in federal court to block the Florida law (SB 4C) that passed during one of several special sessions held this spring. They name as defendants Attorney General James Uthmeier, Statewide Prosecutor Nicholas B. Cox and the state attorneys, or top prosecutors, in each of Florida's 20 judicial circuits. The lawsuit was filed in federal court in Miami on April 2. 'Florida's SB 4C is not just unconstitutional – it's cruel and dangerous,' said Bacardi Jackson, executive director of the ACLU of Florida, in a press release. Requests for comment are pending with Uthmeier's office and Tallahassee-area State Attorney Jack Campbell, president of the Florida Prosecuting Attorneys Association. 'This law strips power from the federal government and hands it to state officers with no immigration training or authority, threatening to tear families apart and detain people who have every legal right to be here. Our communities deserve safety, dignity, and due process – not politically motivated attacks,' Jackson added. The law enacted penalties for people who first enter the country illegally 'by eluding or avoiding examination or inspection by immigration officers' and then also enter the state of Florida. Under the law, for a first offense a person will be charged with a first-degree misdemeanor and, if convicted, has to be sentenced to a mandatory minimum of 9 months, according to a bill analysis. A second violation is a third degree felony and requires a mandatory minimum of a year and a day, and a third or subsequent violation is also a third degree felony and requires a mandatory minimum term of imprisonment of two years. As previously reported, members of the state's own immigration enforcement advisory council have questioned the law. At a meeting in Largo on Monday, Pinellas County Sheriff Bob Gualtieri said the law isn't workable, as it leaves ambiguity as to whether someone has to be charged while entering the state or if being in the state is the crime, and the law requires proof that the person illegally crossed the border. "I don't think you could charge this unless you actually see them enter Florida," he said on Monday. More: Florida officials seek Trump's help in speeding up the deporting of more immigrants The plaintiffs are the Farmworker Association of Florida, the Florida Immigrant Coalition, and Florida residents identified by their initials as Y.M. and V.V. Y.M., 40, is from Honduras and currently lives in Gainesville with her disabled minor son, according to the lawsuit. She came to the United States more than 20 years ago and has an application for a U visa pending since 2022. (A U visa is 'for victims of certain crimes who have suffered mental or physical abuse and are helpful to law enforcement or government officials in the investigation or prosecution of criminal activity,' according to the U.S. Immigration and Customs Services.) V.V. is "a 35-year-old national of Guatemala who lives in Immokalee (and) lives with her husband and her U.S.-citizen children, who are 1, 3, 7, and 14 years old. V.V. was previously deported, and she last reentered the United States without inspection in 2014. She fears being arrested under SB 4C's Illegal Reentry provision and is deeply concerned about being separated from her husband and U.S.-citizen children," according to the complaint. Both Y.M. and V.V. are members of the Florida Immigrant Coalition. Ana Goñi-Lessan, state watchdog reporter for the USA TODAY Network – Florida, can be reached at agonilessan@ This article originally appeared on Tallahassee Democrat: Legal battle begins over Florida law targeting undocumented immigrants
Yahoo
25-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
'It's really unbelievable': Trump deportation flights case takes a turn from insane to surreal
Not only is the Trump administration being cagey in court about details of its deportation flights shipping supposed Venezuelan gang members to be imprisoned in El Salvador, but Donald Trump is now acting like he didn't sign the order behind the deportation flights in the first place. Lee Gelernt, deputy director of the ACLU Immigrants' Rights Project, talks with Rachel Maddow about how things are progressing in court as the Trump administration now tries to claim state secrets prevent them to a
Yahoo
17-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
‘One step closer to constitutional crisis': Lawyer on Trump's use of Alien Enemies Act
An emergency hearing is being held Monday afternoon over the Trump administration's use of the Alien Enemies Act to deport around 300 alleged Venezuelan gang members without a trial. Deputy Director of the ACLU Immigrants' Rights Project Lee Gelernt joins Ana Cabrera while on his way to that very hearing. Also, NBC News' Julia Ainsley and former U.S. attorney Joyce Vance explain more.
Los Angeles Times
10-02-2025
- Politics
- Los Angeles Times
Third judge blocks Trump's order ending birthright citizenship for children of people in U.S. illegally
CONCORD, N.H. — A third federal judge on Monday blocked President Trump's executive order ending birthright citizenship for the children of people who are in the U.S. illegally. The ruling from U.S. District Judge Joseph N. Laplante in New Hampshire comes after two similar rulings by judges in Washington state and Maryland last week. Laplante, who was nominated by Republican President George W. Bush, said he wasn't persuaded by the Trump administration's defense of the executive order. He said he would issue a longer preliminary injunction later explaining his reasoning. A lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union contends that Trump's order violates the Constitution and 'attempts to upend one of the most fundamental American constitutional values.' It was brought on behalf of immigrant rights groups with members who are pregnant and whose children could be affected by the order. 'For people out there feeling scared or confused right now, I would just say that this is a right that's enshrined in the Constitution itself as well as in federal statute,' ACLU Immigrants' Rights Project deputy director Cody Wofsy, who argued the case, said outside the courthouse. 'And we and our partners, we'll keep fighting until this executive order is ended once and for all.' Lawyers representing the Trump administration declined to comment Monday. But Trump's Republican administration asserts that children of noncitizens are not 'subject to the jurisdiction' of the United States and therefore are not entitled to citizenship. The administration is appealing the Seattle-based judge's block on Trump's executive order. At least nine lawsuits have been filed to challenge the birthright citizenship order. In the case filed by four states in Seattle, U.S. District Judge John C. Coughenour said last week the Trump administration was attempting to ignore the Constitution. 'The rule of law is, according to him, something to navigate around or something ignored, whether that be for political or personal gain,' said Coughenour, who was appointed by Republican President Reagan. 'In this courtroom and under my watch the rule of law is a bright beacon, which I intend to follow.' A federal judge in Maryland also blocked Trump's order in another case brought by immigrants' rights groups and pregnant women whose soon-to-be-born children could be affected. The Trump administration has not yet filed an appeal of the preliminary injunction issued by U.S. District Judge Deborah Boardman, who was appointed by President Biden, a Democrat. A federal judge in Boston also heard arguments last week in a suit filed by a group of 18 states. U.S. District Judge Leo Sorokin, who was appointed by President Obama, another Democrat, did not immediately rule. Laplante, the judge in New Hampshire, praised both sides for the way they made their cases. 'I'm not persuaded by the defendants' arguments on this motion,' he said. 'I have to say: I'm not offended by them, either, as a lawyer or a jurist. I think the rule of law is best served, best maintained and preserved when excellent practitioners present their arguments to the court with all the experience, expertise and knowledge they can muster.' At the heart of the lawsuits in the three cases is the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, ratified in 1868 after the Civil War and the Dred Scott Supreme Court decision, which held that Scott, an enslaved man, wasn't a citizen despite having lived in a state where slavery was outlawed. In 1898, in a case known as United States vs. Wong Kim Ark, the Supreme Court found that the only children who did not automatically receive U.S. citizenship upon being born on U.S. soil were children of diplomats, who have allegiance to another government; enemies present in the U.S. during hostile occupation; those born on foreign ships; and those born to members of sovereign Native American tribes. The U.S. is among about 30 countries where birthright citizenship — the principle of jus soli, or 'right of the soil' — is applied. Most are in the Americas and Canada and Mexico are among them. Whitehurst and McCormack write for the Associated Press. Whitehurst reported from Washington. AP writers Michael Casey in Boston and Mike Catalini in Trenton, N.J., contributed to this report.
