LANSING, Mich. — That issue of birthright citizenship, and who gets designated a U.S citizen, has been a topic discussed in the United States since the Civil War.
And it took another turn on Monday with President Trump’s executive order looking to limit birthright citizenship. Trump has been pushing the change since the campaign trails, prompting multiple lawsuits from 22 states, including Michigan, challenging the order and its legality.
The question of legality continues to be up in the air after a federal court in Washington put a pause on the executive order, blocking the policy from taking effect for 14 days.
But there is still another active lawsuit that Michigan's Attorney General Dana Nessel is involved with that's continuing to raise questions for all involved.
“I recognize that Donald Trump is the duly elected President of the United States, and also that he won the state of Michigan," said Nessel. "But it doesn't allow him to violate federal law or the Constitution.”
She's not alone in challenging Trump's executive order, making her position clear.
“I swore an oath to uphold the Constitution of the State of Michigan and the Constitution of the United States, and by bringing this lawsuit, that's exactly what I'm doing,” said Nessel.
The thought of these lawsuits has raised some questions, like: Can the states bring a suit against the federal government?
Kyla Stepp, a political science professor at Central Michigan University, says its not uncommon, citing instances from Trump's last presidency.
“It's certainly something we've seen in the past," Stepp said. "In particular with President Trump's executive orders, you know, the Muslim bans, so to speak, from the last time Trump was in office, those were challenged by states.”
The issue at hand for many of the plaintiffs involved in the lawsuits is the effect the order can have on its people, especially here in the mitten.
“We have approximately 6,000 children that are born here annually and subject to birthright citizenship," Nessel said. "It would be very problematic for them and very problematic for the state government.“
The executive order could potentially cost states thousands of dollars with many children of migrants filling up essential programs.
"[That's] between the foster care programs, the educational programs, the health care programs that are reimbursed by the federal government and no longer would be,” said Nessel.
Right now, birthright citizenship is constitutionally protected, so is it even legal to eliminate it? Not yet, but it could be with one major hurdle.
“I think most legal scholars would agree that Trump's executive order isn't constitutional without some more action," Stepp said. “A constitutional amendment would be the only way to overcome birthright citizenship."
But making changes to the 14th Amendment — or any amendment — is no small order.
“About three quarters of the states have to agree in order to get a constitutional amendment, which is a very high bar and very difficult to do," Stepp said.
The executive order would apply to children of migrants born after Feb. 19. Stepp says the court’s decision in Seattle should push back that deadline, as the courts continue to schedule hearings.
Follow FOX 17: Facebook - X (formerly Twitter) - Instagram - YouTube
