New York Attorney General Letitia James vehemently criticized the U.S. Supreme Court in response to its significant ruling regarding President Donald Trump’s attempt to abolish birthright citizenship, highlighting her deep personal investment in the case she initiated.
New York Attorney General Letitia James vehemently criticized the U.S. Supreme Court in response to its significant ruling regarding President Donald Trump’s attempt to abolish birthright citizenship, highlighting her deep personal investment in the case she initiated.
In her statement, the Democrat condemned the conservative majority of the high court for nullifying the capacity of federal district judges to issue nationwide injunctions, a legal strategy that has hindered many aspects of President Trump’s agenda for his second term.
“Every child born on U.S. soil is a citizen of this country, regardless of the state in which they are born. This principle has been upheld for over a century,” James remarked, labeling the ruling a “profound and disappointing setback for families who now confront significant uncertainty and peril, for the millions who depend on the judiciary to safeguard their constitutional rights, and for the essential rule of law.”
Attorneys representing the Trump administration contended in “Trump v. CASA” that the power of local judges to enforce nationwide injunctions likely surpasses “the equitable authority that Congress has conferred upon federal courts,” proposing instead that an injunction should be limited to the specific individuals or parties involved in the case.
With the court’s 6-3 ruling, Trump’s executive order regarding the elimination of birthright citizenship now extends to any affected individual not involved in “Trump v. CASA,” effectively establishing it as the law of the land, especially since the court chose to avoid addressing the fundamental issue of its constitutionality.
Trump’s directive specifies that any child born after February 19 to parents residing unlawfully in the U.S., or if one parent is illegally present while the other is not a U.S. citizen, would not qualify for birthright citizenship, as outlined in the 14th Amendment.
James was the first individual to initiate legal proceedings against Trump’s directive, contending that New York’s Child Health Plus program, which offers healthcare irrespective of immigration status, would suffer adverse effects as the impacted children would lose access to federal funding.
The Democrat stated that her office, along with other attorneys general, “will persist in defending the Constitution and the shared values that bind us,” suggesting the possibility of further legal measures, as reported by ABC New York.
Whether James will have another opportunity to advocate for birthright citizenship in court may hinge on her ability to do so freely.
Earlier this month, the FBI commenced an investigation into possible mortgage fraud involving James after federal authorities provided evidence indicating she may have misrepresented information on mortgage applications to secure more favorable conditions. Federal Housing Finance Agency Director Bill Pulte referenced documents concerning James’ 2023 acquisition of a Virginia residence, which she claimed as her primary home, as well as ownership records of a New York brownstone where she allegedly identified her father as her spouse.
During the New York State Assembly’s approval of its fiscal year budget, lawmakers incorporated a loophole into state legislation that permits New Yorkers to receive up to $10 million in taxpayer compensation if they encounter “discriminatory or retaliatory” federal charges. Sources acquainted with the amendment indicated it was included to assist James.
Any “legally compulsive process” that commenced after January 1, 2025, would be included, signifying that any lawsuits or criminal charges filed after Trump assumed office would be covered.
