CNN
–
The Court of Appeals will not allow the Trump administration to end the birthright citizenship of certain immigrant children.
The Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Wednesday concluded that a Seattle judge lifted a hold that blocked President Donald Trump’s executive order after a Seattle judge concluded that he violated the constitution. I have rejected the request.
The Ninth Circuit panel, consisting of Trump appointees, Jimmy Carter appointees and George W. Bush appointees, has come to court in a debate set for June. He said he would move forward.
The previous lawsuit in the San Francisco-based Court of Appeal is one of several major legal challenges to policy and one of the first challenges measured by the appeal panel.
In its application, the Justice Department said the birthright executive order is “an integral part of President Trump’s broader efforts to repair the US immigration system and address the ongoing crisis at the tropical border.” I stated.
For decades, under the constitutional amendments of 1868 and the law that preceded it, citizenship has been extended to those born in American soil, regardless of the status of their parents’ immigration. Trump is trying to end birthright citizenship for children whose parents are undocumented or who are legally present in the United States on a temporary visa.
The 9th Circuit arose from a lawsuit filed by the Democratic attorney generals of four states led by Washington. Their applications pushed back the DOJ’s efforts to frame conflicts over the president’s power in the field of immigration.
“This is “not an immigration case,” they wrote. “It is about citizenship rights that the 14th amendment and federal law intentionally and explicitly place, beyond the terms or denial of the President.”
Most of the Ninth Circuit showed that the Trump administration failed during this emergency phase.
Trump’s appointee Judge Daniel Forest has not expressed his opinion on the underlying legal argument, and has not shown that there is a “emergency” that requires immediate attention. I wrote an agreement indicating that I voted for the Trump administration because of this. Court intervention.
“When you determine a substantial issue that is important in a weekly notification, the usual decision-making process comes to mind,” she writes. “We shouldn’t take on this task unless the situation tells us what we have to do. They’re not here.”
This story has been updated with additional details.
