The ruling from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit brings the White House’s theory of citizenship closer to a full Supreme Court review.

A federal appeals court on Wednesday upheld a Seattle judge’s ruling to completely block President Donald Trump’s executive order that limits birthright citizenship.

The appeals court judges decided 2-1 that Trump’s order, which was issued on Inauguration Day, infringes upon the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which declares that “all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States.”

Judge Ronald Gould, a Clinton appointee, stated in his opinion, “One power that the President was not granted, by Article II or by any other source, is the power to modify or change any clause of the United States Constitution.”

Gould’s opinion, which was supported by Judge Michael Hawkins, aligns with U.S. District Court Judge John Coughenour, who issued an indefinite preliminary injunction in February to halt Trump’s order. Such injunctions prevent enforcement while the legal proceedings continue.

Coughenour described Trump’s order as “blatantly unconstitutional.” The lawsuit was initiated by Washington, Oregon, Arizona, Illinois, and two pregnant noncitizen women who were concerned that their children might be born without citizenship in any nation.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Washington Attorney General Nick Brown praised the appeals court’s decision in a statement.

“The court agrees that the president cannot redefine what it means to be American with the stroke of a pen,” Brown remarked. “He cannot strip away the rights, liberties, and protections of children born in our country.”

The ruling from the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals contributes to the growing list of courts that have deemed Trump’s action unconstitutional and have blocked its enforcement. This decision follows the arguments presented by the Department of Justice and the Washington attorney general’s office in early June.

Following those arguments, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that judges like Coughenour had exceeded their authority by blocking Trump’s order on a nationwide scale. The justices determined that nationwide injunctions should be limited.

A federal appeals court on Wednesday upheld a Seattle judge’s ruling to completely block President Donald Trump’s executive order that limits birthright citizenship.

The appeals court judges decided 2-1 that Trump’s order, which was issued on Inauguration Day, infringes upon the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which declares that “all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States.”

Judge Ronald Gould, a Clinton appointee, stated in his opinion, “One power that the President was not granted, by Article II or by any other source, is the power to modify or change any clause of the United States Constitution.”

Gould’s opinion, which was supported by Judge Michael Hawkins, aligns with U.S. District Court Judge John Coughenour, who issued an indefinite preliminary injunction in February to halt Trump’s order. Such injunctions prevent enforcement while the legal proceedings continue.

Coughenour described Trump’s order as “blatantly unconstitutional.” The lawsuit was initiated by Washington, Oregon, Arizona, Illinois, and two pregnant noncitizen women who were concerned that their children might be born without citizenship in any nation.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Washington Attorney General Nick Brown praised the appeals court’s decision in a statement.

“The court agrees that the president cannot redefine what it means to be American with the stroke of a pen,” Brown remarked. “He cannot strip away the rights, liberties, and protections of children born in our country.”

The ruling from the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals contributes to the growing list of courts that have deemed Trump’s action unconstitutional and have blocked its enforcement. This decision follows the arguments presented by the Department of Justice and the Washington attorney general’s office in early June.

Following those arguments, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that judges like Coughenour had exceeded their authority by blocking Trump’s order on a nationwide scale. The justices determined that nationwide injunctions should be limited.

A federal appeals court on Wednesday upheld a Seattle judge’s ruling to completely block President Donald Trump’s executive order that limits birthright citizenship.

The appeals court judges decided 2-1 that Trump’s order, which was issued on Inauguration Day, infringes upon the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which declares that “all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States.”

Judge Ronald Gould, a Clinton appointee, stated in his opinion, “One power that the President was not granted, by Article II or by any other source, is the power to modify or change any clause of the United States Constitution.”

Gould’s opinion, which was supported by Judge Michael Hawkins, aligns with U.S. District Court Judge John Coughenour, who issued an indefinite preliminary injunction in February to halt Trump’s order. Such injunctions prevent enforcement while the legal proceedings continue.

Coughenour described Trump’s order as “blatantly unconstitutional.” The lawsuit was initiated by Washington, Oregon, Arizona, Illinois, and two pregnant noncitizen women who were concerned that their children might be born without citizenship in any nation.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Washington Attorney General Nick Brown praised the appeals court’s decision in a statement.

“The court agrees that the president cannot redefine what it means to be American with the stroke of a pen,” Brown remarked. “He cannot strip away the rights, liberties, and protections of children born in our country.”

The ruling from the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals contributes to the growing list of courts that have deemed Trump’s action unconstitutional and have blocked its enforcement. This decision follows the arguments presented by the Department of Justice and the Washington attorney general’s office in early June.

Following those arguments, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that judges like Coughenour had exceeded their authority by blocking Trump’s order on a nationwide scale. The justices determined that nationwide injunctions should be limited.