Opponents of Trump's birthright citizenship order clash with DOJ regarding scheduling
A judge in Maryland considered the arguments regarding when the president’s order will take effect, which is scheduled for implementation in 30 days.
TroibNews 
Lawyers for the Justice Department and five pregnant immigrants are engaged in a legal battle against President Donald Trump’s executive order regarding birthright citizenship, as they presented their arguments before a federal judge in Maryland on Thursday. The discussion centered on the timeline for the directive's implementation.
During a half-hour telephonic hearing, a Justice Department lawyer asserted that there is no pressing urgency surrounding the six active lawsuits concerning the executive order, citing that it will not take effect until February 19 and applies solely to children born after that date. “The executive order doesn’t become effective for 30 days,” DOJ attorney Brad Rosenberg stated, referring to the directive Trump signed on Monday, which instructs federal agencies to refrain from accepting or issuing U.S. citizenship documents for children born to individuals unlawfully present in the U.S. or those on temporary visas.
In contrast, Joseph Mead, representing the pregnant women and two immigrant rights organizations that filed the suit on Tuesday, contended that certain aspects of the order seem to be effective immediately. He emphasized the uncertainty generated by the executive order is already adversely affecting families and could lead to medical issues for the women involved. “Even today, our plaintiffs are facing irreparable harm in the psychological harm that they have in not knowing the status of their children — children who will be born in the coming weeks and months,” Mead noted, indicating that some women might opt to deliver their babies prematurely to circumvent the deadline imposed by Trump’s order.
U.S. District Court Judge Deborah Boardman, an appointee of President Joe Biden, appeared to resonate with the plaintiffs’ argument that elements of the order may be currently in effect, though she refrained from issuing a ruling.
Rosenberg maintained that the portions of the order not delayed were merely “a preamble” and highlighted that another part directed agencies to develop guidance on the matter. He claimed that he was unaware of any actions taken by the agencies under the order but acknowledged under questioning from Boardman that he hadn’t reached out to all of them. “I can only say that I am not aware of the agencies having taken any steps at this point,” Rosenberg responded. “It is very early within the 30 day window.”
The judge posed a critical question: “If a child born to parents subject to this order is born this afternoon within the United States, would that person be a United States citizen?”
“As I read the executive order, the answer is yes,” Rosenberg replied.
While there is a substantial legal consensus affirming that all children born on U.S. soil are citizens, excluding the offspring of foreign diplomats, Mead argued that the order contradicts this principle. He asserted that this contradiction is already causing confusion and distress, regardless of any impact on passports or legal documents. “Being a U.S. citizen is not about a piece of paper that the government sends you, it’s about much more,” he stated.
In conclusion, Boardman implemented a slower timeline for the proceedings than she had initially proposed, scheduling a hearing for February 5 regarding the motion to block Trump’s order. By that date, it is possible that the order could already be suspended, particularly as at least six lawsuits have been filed in relation to it. Additionally, a federal judge in Seattle is set to hold a hearing later on Thursday concerning an emergency relief request in a related case.
Thomas Evans for TROIB News
During a half-hour telephonic hearing, a Justice Department lawyer asserted that there is no pressing urgency surrounding the six active lawsuits concerning the executive order, citing that it will not take effect until February 19 and applies solely to children born after that date. “The executive order doesn’t become effective for 30 days,” DOJ attorney Brad Rosenberg stated, referring to the directive Trump signed on Monday, which instructs federal agencies to refrain from accepting or issuing U.S. citizenship documents for children born to individuals unlawfully present in the U.S. or those on temporary visas.
In contrast, Joseph Mead, representing the pregnant women and two immigrant rights organizations that filed the suit on Tuesday, contended that certain aspects of the order seem to be effective immediately. He emphasized the uncertainty generated by the executive order is already adversely affecting families and could lead to medical issues for the women involved. “Even today, our plaintiffs are facing irreparable harm in the psychological harm that they have in not knowing the status of their children — children who will be born in the coming weeks and months,” Mead noted, indicating that some women might opt to deliver their babies prematurely to circumvent the deadline imposed by Trump’s order.
U.S. District Court Judge Deborah Boardman, an appointee of President Joe Biden, appeared to resonate with the plaintiffs’ argument that elements of the order may be currently in effect, though she refrained from issuing a ruling.
Rosenberg maintained that the portions of the order not delayed were merely “a preamble” and highlighted that another part directed agencies to develop guidance on the matter. He claimed that he was unaware of any actions taken by the agencies under the order but acknowledged under questioning from Boardman that he hadn’t reached out to all of them. “I can only say that I am not aware of the agencies having taken any steps at this point,” Rosenberg responded. “It is very early within the 30 day window.”
The judge posed a critical question: “If a child born to parents subject to this order is born this afternoon within the United States, would that person be a United States citizen?”
“As I read the executive order, the answer is yes,” Rosenberg replied.
While there is a substantial legal consensus affirming that all children born on U.S. soil are citizens, excluding the offspring of foreign diplomats, Mead argued that the order contradicts this principle. He asserted that this contradiction is already causing confusion and distress, regardless of any impact on passports or legal documents. “Being a U.S. citizen is not about a piece of paper that the government sends you, it’s about much more,” he stated.
In conclusion, Boardman implemented a slower timeline for the proceedings than she had initially proposed, scheduling a hearing for February 5 regarding the motion to block Trump’s order. By that date, it is possible that the order could already be suspended, particularly as at least six lawsuits have been filed in relation to it. Additionally, a federal judge in Seattle is set to hold a hearing later on Thursday concerning an emergency relief request in a related case.
Thomas Evans for TROIB News
