Trump’s personal legal troubles may have evaporated – but his executive orders including one to end birthright citizenship are only beginning.

Civil rights organizations have promptly appealed against the citizenship decree, contending that it breaches the 14th Amendment and a ruling made by the Supreme Court in 1898.

The appeal comes following President Trump’s acknowledgment that his directive to revoke citizenship for babies born in the U.S. to undocumented parents might face legal challenges.

While signing the order just after assuming office in a lengthy session on Monday night, Trump expressed confidence in the legal basis of the order. In response to questions about its constitutionality, he remarked, ‘We believe we are on solid ground. You might be correct. Time will tell,’ President Trump remarked.

The Supreme Court ruled in 1898 that children born to foreign parents inside the U.S. are citizens, citing the 14th Amendment.

The post-Civil War amendment states that ‘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 argues that the policy is a draw for migrants or even tourists who can come to the U.S. and give birth to provide citizenship for their children.

By trying to change the 100-year old policy with the stroke of the pen, absent any action by Congress or a modification of the Constitution, Trump was certain to draw a court battle.

President Donald Trump signed an order he says would end birthright citizenship for children born to parents who aren’t here legally. It drew an immediate legal challenge

‘That’s a good one. Birthright, that’s a big one,’ Trump said as he inked it.

‘We’re the only country in the world that does this with birthright, as you know, and it’s just absolutely ridiculous, but, you know – we’ll see,’ he said. ‘We think it – we have very good grounds. Certain people have wanted to do this for decades,’ Trump added. 

As he plans for mass deportations, Trump has also spoken about sending entire families out of the country. ”I don’t want to be breaking up families,’ he told NBC in December. ‘So the only way you don’t break up the family is you keep them together and you have to send them all back.’ 

Although Trump said no other countries had it, more than 30 including Canada and Mexico have a form of ‘jus soli’ or ‘right to the soil.’ 

Under the 14th Amendment all persons ‘born or naturalized in the United States’ are citizens

Trump calls the current practice ‘ridiculous’ and argues it is a magnet for illegal migration

The lawsuit brought Monday was by members of the Indonesian community in New Hampshire and two groups. It names Trump and multiple agencies.

The framers of the Fourteenth Amendment specifically enshrined this principle in

our Constitution’s text to ensure that no one—not even the President—could deny children born in America their rightful place as citizens. They did so with full knowledge and intent that this would protect the children of immigrants, including those facing discrimination and exclusion,’ lawyers for the plaintiffs wrote.

They cited the case of United States v. Wong Kim Ark, which found that children of noncitizen parents are citizens of the U.S.

It calls the principle an ‘undisturbed constitutional bedrock.’

A National Treasury Employees Union filed suit Monday over Trump’s order making it easier to fire civil service employees. 

The order, which had been expected, removes ‘Schedule F’ protections. It makes it easier for Trump to begin clearing out career federal employees, after spending years raging against what he calls the ‘deep state.’

Trump issued a similar order in 2020 before leaving office and drew legal challenges. 

The citizenship suit argues that Trump overstepped his authority.

‘Neither the Constitution nor any federal statute confers any authority on the President to redefine American citizenship,’ it says. ‘By attempting to limit the right to birthright citizenship, the Order exceeds the President’s authority and runs afoul of the Constitution and federal statute.’

It is signed by a raft of lawyers by the ACLU and other groups, including the State Democracy Defenders Fund and the Asian Law Caucus.