Trump’s executive order points out that the 14th Amendment has never been interpreted to extend citizenship universally to everyone born within the US. It has always excluded from birthright citizenship persons who were born in the US but not ‘subject to the jurisdiction thereof.’

In other words, it requires one of the parents to be a US green card holder or US citizen for the child to get birthright citizenship.

“If you’re born here, you are a citizen — period. No politician, including President Trump, can decide who is American and who is not,” said Aarti Kohli, executive director of the Asian Law Caucus.“For over a century, since a young Chinese American cook from San Francisco named Wong Kim Ark won his case at the Supreme Court in 1898, birthright citizenship for all — including babies born to immigrants — has been a cornerstone of US democracy.

This constitutional protection has been especially vital to Asian American communities, who have faced decades of exclusionary laws. Most Americans’ whose ancestors came after 1898 built their families’ futures on this very right. Wong Kim Ark’s legacy lives on in every child born to immigrant parents today, and we stand ready to mount a formidable response to any attempt to strip away this essential freedom.”

Jacksonville based, Ashwin Sharma, an immigration attorney, told TOI, “The phrase ‘subject to the jurisdiction thereof’ has been consistently interpreted to include nearly all individuals born on US soil, irrespective of their parents’ immigration status, other than children of enemy occupiers or diplomats.

“Trump’s EO relies on a selective and self-serving reinterpretation of ‘subject to the jurisdiction thereof.’ The sweeping language of the executive order excludes from eligibility the children of undocumented immigrants as well as children of legal non-immigrants, such as H-1B visa holders, F-1 students, and other temporary residents. By placing the citizenship of these US-born children in jeopardy, the EO creates great uncertainty for immigrant families who have long contributed to the US economy and society.

And for a President who claims to champion merit and hard work, this order is a harsh blow to those who exemplify those very ideals.”

“Birthright citizenship is guaranteed in our Constitution and is absolutely central to what America stands for,” said Cody Wofsy, deputy director of the ACLU’s Immigrants’ Rights Project and lead attorney in this case. “Denying citizenship to babies born on US soil is illegal, profoundly cruel, and contrary to our values as a country.”

Rajiv S Khanna, managing attorney at Immigration.com summed up, “The EO is most certainly going to be challenged on constitutional grounds. It is at its weakest when it announces that even children born in the US to parents who are in the United States legally, albeit temporarily, will not be considered US citizens. At issue is the constitutional language ‘under the jurisdiction of’. It is both legally impossible and commonsensically ludicrous to claim that a person in the US, who is accountable for disobeying the laws of the US is not under the jurisdiction of the United States.

Such children would also be unable to obtain required identification and, as they grow up, be denied the right to vote, serve on juries, hold certain jobs, and otherwise be a full member of American society, even though they were born in the US and have never lived anywhere else.