Federal Accountability

OAKLAND – California Attorney General Rob Bonta today, along with the attorneys general of New Jersey, Massachusetts, Delaware, Colorado, Connecticut, Hawaii, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Nevada, New York, and Vermont, and the City and County of San Francisco, issued a joint statement in response to a decision by the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts granting a preliminary injunction against President Trump’s unconstitutional executive order terminating birthright citizenship. On January 21, 2025, Attorney General Bonta, New Jersey Attorney General Matt Platkin, and Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Campbell led a coalition of 19 states in filing a lawsuit challenging the order.

“President Trump may believe that he is above the law, but today’s preliminary injunction sends a clear message: He is not a king, and he cannot rewrite the Constitution with the stroke of a pen. 

“The President and his allies made clear long before he was sworn in that they would pursue this illegal action, and our coalition was prepared to challenge it as soon as President Trump fulfilled this unconstitutional campaign promise on Inauguration Day.

“We immediately stood up for our Constitution, for the rule of law, and for American children across the country who would have been deprived of their constitutional rights – and today we delivered for them. This is not yet over, and we will continue to fight every single step of the way until President Trump is permanently prevented from trampling on the Fourteenth Amendment rights of all Americans.”

President Trump issued an executive order on January 20, 2025, fulfilling his campaign promise to end birthright citizenship, in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution and Section 1401 of the Immigration and Nationality Act. To stop the President’s unlawful action, which would have harmed hundreds of thousands of American children and their families, the coalition sued in the District of Massachusetts to invalidate the executive order and to enjoin any actions taken to implement it. The states requested immediate relief to prevent the President’s order from taking effect. The request was granted by Judge Leo Sorokin. 

Birthright citizenship dates back centuries—including to pre-Civil War America. Although the Supreme Court’s notorious decision in Dred Scott denied birthright citizenship to the descendants of slaves, the post-Civil War United States adopted the Fourteenth Amendment to protect citizenship for children born in this country. As the filings explain, the U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly confirmed that birthright citizenship does not depend on the immigration status of the baby’s parents.

If allowed to stand, this order would have, for the first time since the Fourteenth Amendment was adopted in 1868, meant thousands of babies born each year in California who otherwise would have been citizens would no longer enjoy the privileges and benefits of citizenship. The children whose citizenship would be stripped by the President’s order would lose their most basic rights and would be forced to live under the threat of deportation. They would lose eligibility for a wide range of federal services and programs. They would lose their ability obtain a Social Security number and, as they age, to work lawfully. And they would lose their right to vote, serve on juries, and run for certain offices. Despite the Constitution’s guarantee of citizenship, thousands of children would — for the first time — lose their ability to fully and fairly be a part of American society as a citizen with all its benefits and privileges.

In addition to harming hundreds of thousands of residents, the President’s order would have significantly harmed the States themselves, too. Among other things, this order would cause the states to lose federal funding to programs that they administer, such as Medicaid, the Children’s Health Insurance Program, and foster care and adoption assistance programs, which all turn at least in part on the immigration status of the resident being served. States would also be required — at their considerable expense — to immediately begin modifying their operation and administration of benefits programs to account for this change, which would impose significant burdens on multiple agencies that operate programs for the benefit of the States’ residents. The States’ filings explain that they should not have to bear these dramatic costs while their case proceeds because the order is directly inconsistent with the Constitution, the Immigration and Nationality Act, and two U.S. Supreme Court decisions.

A copy of the court’s decision is available here. A copy of the preliminary injunction order is available here. 

OAKLAND — California Attorney General Rob Bonta today issued the following statement in response to the U.S. District Court for Massachusetts granting a temporary restraining order that bars the Trump Administration’s unlawful and drastic National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding cuts from taking effect. Attorney General Bonta, as part of a coalition of 22 attorneys general, announced suing the Trump Administration over the NIH funding cuts earlier today and sought the temporary restraining order at issue. The temporary restraining order is in effect within the Plaintiff States until further order from the court.

“I am pleased that the federal district court has promptly granted our request for a temporary restraining order. The Trump Administration unlawfully sought to eviscerate funding for medical research, and they are now blocked from doing so. My fellow attorneys general and I will be closely monitoring to ensure that the Trump Administration follows the court’s order. Public and private universities in California are doing life-saving research that would otherwise be disrupted.”

A copy of the court’s order granting the temporary restraining order can be found here.

State attorneys general continue to secure favorable decisions reining in Presidential overreach 

OAKLAND – California Attorney General Rob Bonta today issued the following statement in response to a decision by the U.S. District Court for the District of Rhode Island to enforce the court’s prior order preventing the Trump Administration from implementing its freeze of up to $3 trillion in federal funding. The decision follows a motion to enforce filed by state attorneys general on Friday in light of evidence that the Trump Administration was continuing to block the disbursement of important state funding, including funding under the Inflation Reduction Act and Infrastructure, Investment, and Jobs Act, and for the National Institutes of Health. 

“The Trump Administration continued to improperly freeze vital federal funding more than a week after a court ordered it not to, jeopardizing California’s efforts to strengthen domestic energy security and the construction of critical infrastructure projects,” said Attorney General Bonta. “No Administration is above the law. In every case we’ve filed to date, state attorneys general have successfully restrained the President’s abuse of executive power – and we will continue to hold him accountable; our democratic institutions depend on it. The court’s decision today is unequivocal: The Trump Administration must fully comply with the court’s order and immediately restore all federal funding while our litigation continues."

Attorney General Bonta is leading a coalition of 23 attorney general, along with the attorneys general of New York, Rhode Island, Massachusetts, and Illinois, in bringing this litigation.

A copy of the court’s decision in available here.

Coalition also seeks court order barring Trump Administration from implementing drastic funding cuts

OAKLAND — As part of a coalition of 22 attorneys general, California Attorney General Rob Bonta today announced filing a lawsuit against the Trump Administration, the Department of Health and Human Services, and the National Institutes of Health (NIH) for unlawfully decimating funds that support cutting-edge medical and public health research at universities and research institutions across the country. Filed in the U.S. District Court for Massachusetts, the lawsuit challenges the Trump Administration’s attempt to unilaterally cut “indirect cost” reimbursements at every research institution throughout the country, including at the University of California (UC) and at the California State University (CSU). Indirect cost reimbursements are based on each institution’s unique needs, negotiated with the federal government through a carefully regulated process, and then memorialized in an executed agreement. In addition to filing today’s lawsuit, the coalition is seeking a temporary restraining order to bar the Trump Administration’s action from taking effect.

“We are suing President Trump and his administration because they are once again violating the law. Let’s be clear about what they are seeking to do now: they want to eviscerate funding for medical research that helps develop new cures and treatments for diseases like cancer and Alzheimer’s,” said Attorney General Rob Bonta. “The stakes are especially high here in California. Ours is a state known as a national and global leader in life-saving biomedical research, and I will not allow the Trump Administration to jeopardize the extraordinary work being done right now by scientists, scholars, medical professionals, and other workers.”

“Like scores of institutions across the country, the University of California has relied on NIH grants to pursue life-saving research that benefits Americans nationwide,” said UC President Michael V. Drake, M.D. “Cuts of this magnitude would deal a devastating blow to our country’s research and innovation enterprise, undermine our global competitiveness, and, if allowed to go forward, will ultimately delay or derail progress toward treatment and cures for many of the most serious diseases that plague us today. We stand ready to fight to protect this critical investment in a healthier and more prosperous America.”

"Federal grant funding is vital to the CSU’s teaching and research mission, which addresses some of society’s most urgent challenges in health care, agriculture, water, fire prevention and cybersecurity,” said CSU spokesperson Jason Maymon. “The NIH’s drastic reduction in reimbursement for previously agreed upon administrative costs will leave the CSU’s 23 universities with millions in unfunded expenses, jeopardizing critical research and support systems needed for program success. This decision threatens not only groundbreaking research but also the future of student innovation and scientific progress."

"UAW 4811 is proud to support this suit because of its tremendous impact on our members and the critical research they do on projects ranging from cancer to Alzheimer's disease,” said UAW 4811 President Rafael Jaime.

This past Friday, February 7, the NIH announced it would abruptly slash indirect cost rates to an across-the-board 15% rate, which is significantly less than the cost required to perform cutting edge medical research. The NIH purported to make this cut effective the very next business day, Monday, February 10, giving universities and institutions no time to plan for the enormous budget gaps they are now facing. The reimbursements at issue cover expenses to facilitate biomedical research, like lab, faculty, infrastructure, and utility costs. Without immediate relief, this action could result in the suspension of lifesaving and life-extending clinical trials, disruption of research programs, staffing cuts, and laboratory closures. 

In today’s lawsuit, the attorneys general argue that the Trump Administration’s action violates the Administrative Procedure Act in multiple ways. For example, the attorneys general argue that the action is arbitrary and capricious and violates a directive Congress passed during President Trump’s first term to fend off his earlier proposal to drastically cut research reimbursements. That statutory language, still in effect, prohibits the NIH from requiring categorial and indiscriminate changes to indirect cost reimbursements.  

Most NIH-funding research occurs outside of federal government institutions such as both public and private universities and colleges. In California, this includes: 

• The University of California. The UC system has 21 health professional sciences schools, five NCI-designated cancer centers, and six academic medical centers widely recognized as among the best in the nation, and they are international leaders in the education of health professionals, in research that develops new cures and treatments, and in public service that provides healthcare for all Californians regardless of ability to pay. Federal funds are UC’s single most important source of support for its research, accounting for more than half of UC’s total research awards. In Fiscal Year 2023, UC received a total of over $2 billion in NIH contract and grant funding.
• The California State University. The CSU system is the largest public university system in the United States and consists of 23 campuses. In the last audited year, CSU campuses received approximately $158 million in NIH funds.  

The NIH is the primary source of federal funding for medical research in the United States. Medical research funding by NIH grants have led to innumerable scientific breakthroughs, including the discovery of treatment for cancers of all types, the first sequencing of DNA, and the development of the MRI. Additionally, dozens of NIH-supported scientists have earned Nobel Prizes for their groundbreaking scientific work. 

In filing today’s lawsuit, Attorney General Bonta joins the attorneys general of: Arizona, Connecticut, Colorado, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, and Wisconsin.

A copy of the lawsuit can be found here. 

Court finds DOGE access heightens risk of U.S. Treasury Department's vulnerability to hacking 

OAKLAND – California Attorney General Rob Bonta today issued the following statement on the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York's decision granting a temporary restraining order that immediately blocked Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) associates from accessing Americans’ personal and private information while the states’ litigation proceeds. 

“Our country cannot afford to have people in the driver’s seat who move fast and break things, especially when the things they’re breaking are critical and sensitive systems that millions of Americans’ rely on. We are pleased the court swiftly granted our request to block unauthorized personnel, including DOGE associates, from accessing millions of Americans’ private and sensitive data,” said Attorney General Bonta. “The President does not hold the power to give Americans’ bank account and social security numbers to anyone he’d like — and as of Friday night, he must stop doing so.” 

Yesterday, Attorney General Bonta joined a coalition of 19 attorneys general in filing a lawsuit seeking to block DOGE associates from accessing sensitive Treasury Department material, including millions of Americans’ bank account and social security numbers. Hours after filing the lawsuit, the court responded by granting the requested temporary restraining order while the states seek a preliminary injunction.

While the order is in effect, the Trump Administration may not grant access to Treasury Department records to political appointees, special government employees, and any government employee from an agency outside the Treasury Department’s Bureau of Fiscal Services, including members of DOGE. Treasury Department material may not be accessed by any person outside of civil servants within the Bureau of Fiscal Services who have passed all background checks and security clearances. The order also directs any person prohibited above from having sensitive information, but who has accessed such information, records, and systems since January 20, 2025, to immediately destroy all copies of material. 

A copy of the decision is available here.

DOGE access blatantly violates Americans’ right to privacy

OAKLAND — California Attorney General Rob Bonta today filed a lawsuit challenging the Trump Administration’s decision to expand access to data maintained by the Treasury Department’s Bureau of the Fiscal Service (BFS). In today’s lawsuit, 19 attorneys general argue that this executive action has allowed people associated with the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) to access Americans’ personal and private information, including bank account and social security numbers. The lawsuit seeks to immediately halt improper access to this sensitive information while litigation proceeds. 

“President Trump’s and the Treasury Department’s actions to allow DOGE access to Americans’ private information is chilling and unconstitutional — and Americans are paying attention,” said Attorney General Bonta. “Millions entrust the federal government to carry out vital operations that people rely on every day. In doing so, we also entrust them with our sensitive and personal information. This week’s action is a breach of that trust and a gross and blatant power grab. The President does not hold the power to give Americans’ bank account and social security numbers to anyone he’d like. I am proud to stand with attorneys general around the country to demand the immediate halt to this violation of both trust and law.”

Since Inauguration Day, DOGE has infiltrated executive agencies with the goal of eliminating federal funding, services, and personnel. Starting last week, there have been reports of billionaire Elon Musk and his DOGE associates gaining an unprecedented level of access to vital payment systems of the U.S. Treasury, which provide access to Americans’ extremely sensitive information, like social security numbers. 

The Treasury Department payment systems — managed by BFS — are responsible for trillions of dollars in U.S. government payments. Millions of Americans rely on the support of these payments for services like health care, childcare, and other essential programs, like Social Security, Medicare benefits, veteran’s benefits, salaries for federal employees, and tax refunds. The Treasury Department’s payment systems are critical, sensitive, and incredibly vital. Given their critical importance to U.S. government operations, these systems have been highly regulated and tightly guarded — but with the election of Donald Trump, are no longer safe. 

In the complaint filed today, the attorneys general allege the Trump Administration has no constitutional, statutory, or regulatory authority to widen access to the BFS payment system for political appointees or special government employees, including members of DOGE. As such, the attorneys general seek both a temporary restraining order to immediately stop this practice and a permanent injunction barring political appointees, special government employees, and any government employee from an agency outside the Treasury Department from accessing BFS systems and Americans’ private personally identifying information. 

In filing the lawsuit today, Attorney General Bonta is joined by the attorneys general of New York, Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, North Carolina, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Wisconsin. 

A copy of the complaint can be found here. A copy of the request for a temporary restraining order can be found here. 

In light of evidence of Trump Administration continuing to block state funding under the Inflation Reduction Act and Infrastructure, Investment, and Jobs Act, states file motion to enforce existing court order 

Preliminary injunction motion highlights the significant threats posed by the Trump Administration’s funding freeze, affecting access to food, healthcare, and crucial services that states provide  

More than $100 billion in Medicaid funding, tens of billions in infrastructure and climate funding, among the funding at risk in just California 

OAKLAND — California Attorney General Rob Bonta today led a coalition of 23 attorneys general in filing a motion to enforce and a motion for preliminary injunction in NY v. Trump, the ongoing lawsuit challenging actions by President Trump, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), and federal agencies attempting to pause nearly $3 trillion in federal assistance funding allocated to the states that support critical programs and services that benefit the American people. The coalition today seeks to preliminarily enjoin the Trump Administration’s actions to impose a funding freeze, emphasizing the widespread and irreparable harm to states, which rely on billions of dollars of critical federal assistance for public services that ensure access to education, clean air and water, and health care and that support essential infrastructure projects.  

The motion further highlights the harm states face if funds under the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) and Infrastructure, Investment, and Jobs Act (IIJA, also known as the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law) are not allocated as required by statute. IRA and IIJA funding strengthens domestic energy security, reduces energy costs, diversifies our domestic energy resources, rebuilds our domestic manufacturing economy, bolsters and modernizes critical infrastructure, and creates well-paying jobs while simultaneously reducing harmful pollution. Citing evidence of ongoing disruptions impacting disbursements to states, and federal funds that remain blocked under the IRA and IIJA despite the court’s Temporary Restraining Order (TRO), which remains in place, the coalition also seeks to enforce the TRO to require the Trump Administration to disperse these funds.  

“Let’s be crystal clear: the power of the purse belongs to Congress, not the President,” said Attorney General Bonta. “The Trump Administration’s dangerous and unconstitutional actions have created chaos and confusion across this country, and caused significant harm to states across the country and the millions of Americans who rely on federal funding, from children to the elderly. In yet another unlawful move, we have evidence that despite the Temporary Restraining Order we secured, the Trump Administration has continued to block funds needed for our domestic energy security, transportation, and infrastructure provided under the IRA and IIJA. We’re asking the court to enforce its order and ensure that the Trump Administration reinstates access to this critical funding. No one is above the law, and at the California Department of Justice, we will not waver in our commitment to uphold the law and ensure that necessary funding for critical programs and services in states across our country can continue.”

In just this fiscal year, California is expected to receive $168 billion in federal funds – 34% of the state’s budget – not including funding for the state’s public college and university system. This includes $107.5 billion in funding for California’s Medicaid programs, which serve approximately 14.5 million Californians, including 5 million children and 2.3 million seniors and people with disabilities. Additionally, over 9,000 full-time equivalent state employee positions are federally funded. As detailed in the preliminary injunction motion, without access to federal financial assistance, many states could face immediate cash shortfalls, making it difficult to administer basic programs like funding for healthcare and food for children and to address their most pressing needs.

Additionally, as of January 2025, California has been awarded $63 billion from the IIJA and nearly $5 billion from the IRA, not including funds going to California cities, air and water districts, or other political subdivisions. Due to ongoing disruptions impacting disbursements to states despite the court’s TRO, efforts that bolster clean energy investments, transportation, and infrastructure have been put at risk, including:

• The Home Electrification and Appliances Rebates Program, for which the IRA appropriates $4.5 billion to the Department of Energy. The rebate program, administered by state energy offices under final federal grants, subsidizes low- and moderate-income households’ purchase and installation of electric heat pump water heaters, electric heat pump space heating and cooling systems, and other home electrification projects. Thousands of California homeowners have signed up for these programs, received approvals, and even started installation in reliance on these rebates, and are stuck paying their contractors an extra $8,000 if our state energy offices cannot draw down funds. As of February 5, that remained the case: the home rebate grants were being held “for agency review.”

• The Solar for All program, administered by EPA and funded by the IRA’s Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund, awarded $7 billion to 60 grantees to install rooftop and community solar energy projects in low-income and disadvantaged communities. These awards—all subject to final grant agreements—support the construction of cheap, resilient power in underserved neighborhoods, and provide particular protection to communities in which wildfire risk regularly causes utilities to de-energize transmission lines. As of February 5, numerous states in the coalition were unable to access their Solar For All grant accounts. 

• The Climate Pollution Reduction Grant program, administered by EPA and funded by a $5 billion IRA appropriation, supports states, tribes, and local governments in planning and implementing greenhouse-gas reduction measures. For example, the regional air district covering Los Angeles received a $500 million award, subject to a final grant agreement, to clean up the highly polluting goods movement corridor between the Imperial Valley's logistics hubs and warehouses to the Port of Los Angeles. As of February 5, this grant and other Climate Pollution Reduction Grants remained inaccessible. 

• The national air monitoring network and research program under Clean Air Act sections 103 to 105, which has been administered by EPA for the last sixty years to protect communities from dangerous pollution. The IRA appropriated $117.5 million to fund air monitoring grants under this program to increase states’ abilities to detect dangerous pollution like particulate matter (soot) and air toxics, especially in disadvantaged communities. These pollutants create a particular public health emergency in areas recovering from wildfires. As of February 5, air monitoring grants remained inaccessible. 

Amid evidence that the Trump Administration has continued to block these critical funds, in violation of the court's order, the attorneys general filed a motion to enforce to ensure that the funds are swiftly dispersed so that states can put them to use to protect for the health and well-being of their residents. 

Attorney General Bonta, along with the attorneys general of New York, Rhode Island, Massachusetts and Illinois, led the attorneys general of Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Hawaii, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, North Carolina, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Vermont, Washington, and Wisconsin in filing the motions.  

The motion to enforce and motion for a preliminary injunction is available here.

OAKLAND – California Attorney General Rob Bonta today issued the following statement on the U.S. District Court for the District of Rhode Island’s decision granting a temporary restraining order to prevent a pause on critical federal assistance funding from going into effect:

“Today’s court order ensures our communities are able to continue to access necessary federal funding for disaster recovery, including for California's wildfire recovery efforts; education; public health and safety; and infrastructure projects. While the OMB directive was rescinded, the Administration has made clear that it intends to proceed with its plans to freeze federal funding – that's why we went to court to get this emergency pause. 

The Trump Administration is intentionally creating chaos through its public actions and statements, attempting to sow fear and confusion in our communities. We will not fall for this bait and switch. California has too much at stake. 

I am grateful for the court’s decision, and I will continue fighting to ensure that the President’s disastrous federal funding freeze never sees the light of day.” 

Attorney General Bonta co-led a multistate coalition in filing a lawsuit seeking to block the federal funding freeze on Tuesday.

Today’s decision institutes a temporary restraining order while the states seek a preliminary injunction. While the order is in effect, the Trump Administration may not pause, freeze, impede, block, cancel, or terminate its awards or obligations to provide federal financial assistance unless specifically allowed under the law. The order also blocks the Trump Administration from reissuing, adopting, implementing, or otherwise giving effect to the OMB directive under any other name or title, such as the continued implementation identified by the White House Press Secretary's statement on January 29, 2025. 

The Trump Administration is required to give written notice of this order to all agencies and their employees, contractors, and grantees by Monday, February 3, 2025, at 9 a.m. ET. 

This order extends beyond the administrative stay granted by the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia in response to a lawsuit brought by nonprofit groups that receive federal funds. 

A copy of the decision is available here.

New OMB directive would pause funding for disaster recovery, as well as public health, education, and public safety programs 

SACRAMENTO — California Attorney General Rob Bonta today, along with New York Attorney General Letitia James, led a coalition of 23 attorneys general in filing a lawsuit to block implementation of a memo by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) threatening to freeze up to $3 trillion in federal assistance funding effective at 2pm PT / 5pm ET today. The attorneys general are seeking a temporary restraining order to block the memo from taking effect, citing immediate harms to their states, which stand to lose billions in funding essential for the administration of vital programs that support the health and safety of their residents. Already, the order has thrown state programs into chaos and created uncertainty around their administration. Impacted programs include disaster-relief funding necessary for Los Angeles’ recovery from recent wildfires, as well as public health, education, public safety, and government programs.

“The Trump Administration is recklessly disregarding the health, wellbeing, and public safety of the people it is supposed to serve,” said Attorney General Bonta. “This directive is unprecedented in scope and would be devastating if implemented. Already, it has created chaos and confusion among our residents. I will not stand by while the President attempts to disrupt vital programs that feed our kids, provide medical care to our families, and support housing and education in our communities. Instead of learning from the defeats of his first Administration, President Trump is once again plowing ahead with a damaging – and most importantly, unlawful – agenda. I’m proud to co-lead a coalition of attorneys general in taking him to court.” 

The OMB directive freezing federal funding less than 24 hours after it was announced will cause immediate and irreparable harm to the states every day that it is in effect — in the form of millions of dollars in funds and mass regulatory chaos. Many states could face immediate cash shortfalls, making it difficult to administer basic programs like funding for healthcare and food for children and to address their most pressing emergency needs. This will result in devastating consequences for California in particular, given the uncertainty around continued disbursement of FEMA funding that is essential for recovery from the Los Angeles wildfires, which have caused an estimated $150 billion in economic losses.

In the lawsuit, the attorneys general argue that the OMB directive violates the U.S. Constitution, violates the Administrative Procedure Act, and is arbitrary and capricious. Specifically, the attorneys general argue that Congress has not delegated any unilateral authority to OMB to indefinitely pause all federal financial assistance under any circumstance, irrespective of the federal statutes and contractual terms governing those grants, and without even considering them. The directive also violates the “separation of powers” between Congress and the Executive Branch because the Spending Clause of the U.S. Constitution gives the power of the purse exclusively to Congress. The attorneys general seek a temporary restraining order to block the directive from being implemented.   

Attorney General Bonta is joined by the attorneys general of New York, Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, North Carolina, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, Wisconsin, and the District of Columbia in filing the lawsuit.  

A copy of the complaint is available here.  

Seeks court order to ensure U.S. citizenship rights of American-born children continue to be recognized while litigation proceeds  

SAN FRANCISCO – California Attorney General Rob Bonta today filed a lawsuit challenging the Trump Administration’s unconstitutional executive order seeking to end birthright citizenship. Under the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, all children born on U.S. soil are automatically granted U.S. citizenship and the rights and privileges that come with it. In 1898, the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed this right in a case brought by Wong Kim Ark, a San Francisco-born, Chinese-American man who had been denied his re-entry rights after a trip abroad. In today’s lawsuit, 18 state attorneys general – led by California, New Jersey, and Massachusetts – argue that President Trump’s unprecedented executive order violates the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution and Section 1401 of the Immigration and Nationality Act and should be immediately blocked from going into effect while litigation proceeds. 

“The President’s executive order attempting to rescind birthright citizenship is blatantly unconstitutional and quite frankly, un-American,” said Attorney General Bonta. “As home of Wong Kim Ark, a San Francisco native who fought – successfully – to have his U.S. citizenship recognized, California condemns the President’s attempts to erase history and ignore 125 years of Supreme Court precedent. We are asking a court to immediately block this order from taking effect and ensure that the rights of American-born children impacted by this order remain in effect while litigation proceeds. The President has overstepped his authority by a mile with this order, and we will hold him accountable.” 

From the beginning of our nation’s history, America followed the common law tradition that those born on U.S. soil are subject to its laws and are citizens by birth. Although the Supreme Court’s notorious decision in Dred Scott denied birthright citizenship to the descendants of enslaved people, the post-Civil War United States adopted the Fourteenth Amendment to protect citizenship for children born in the country. The Fourteenth Amendment’s Citizenship Clause explicitly promises that “[a]ll persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.” 

The U.S. Supreme Court affirmed this constitutional right in 1898 when a San Francisco-born, Chinese American man was denied entry back into the United States after visiting relatives in China on the grounds that he was not a citizen. In United States v. Wong Kim Ark, the Supreme Court established that children born in the United States, including those born to immigrants, could not be denied citizenship. 

Within hours of taking office, the President issued an executive order disregarding the U.S. Constitution and this long-established precedent. The order directs federal agencies to prospectively deny the citizenship rights of American-born children whose parents are not lawful residents. The order instructs the Social Security Administration and Department of State, respectively, to cease issuing social security numbers and U.S. passports to these children, and directs all federal agencies to treat these children as ineligible for any privilege, right, or benefit that is reserved by law to individuals who are U.S. citizens.

If allowed to stand, the order would strip tens of thousands of children born each year of their ability to fully and fairly be a part of American society as rightful citizens, with all the benefits and privileges. These children would lose their most basic rights and be forced to live under the threat of deportation. They would lose eligibility for a wide range of federal benefits programs. They would lose their ability obtain a Social Security number and, as they age, to work lawfully. And they would lose their right to vote, serve on juries, and run for certain offices. 

The executive order would also directly harm California and other states, causing them to risk federal funding for vital programs that they administer, such as Medicaid and the Children’s Health Insurance Program; these programs are conditioned on the citizenship and immigration status of the children they serve. In addition, states would be required — on little notice and at considerable expense — to immediately begin modifying their operation and administration of benefits programs to account for this change by February 19, when the order goes into effect.

In today’s filings, the attorneys general contend that President Trump’s executive order is a flagrant violation of the Constitution and the Immigration and Nationality Act and would cause irreparable harm to the states and their residents. As such, the attorneys general seek a nationwide preliminary injunction to prevent the denial of the constitutional rights of tens of thousands of babies born each year in the U.S. who otherwise would have been, and should be, citizens, including an estimated 24,500 children born in California annually, and the disruption vitally important public health and other federal benefit programs. 

Attorney General Bonta is joined by the attorneys general of New Jersey, Massachusetts, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina Rhode Island, Vermont, and Wisconsin, along with the City of San Francisco. 

A copy of the complaint can be found here.