U.S. bishops among supporters of lawsuit against Trump birthright citizenship executive order

WASHINGTON (OSV News) — The U.S. bishops and a Catholic immigration advocacy group were among those who offered their support to a lawsuit challenging President Donald Trump’s executive order limiting birthright citizenship.

Oral argument in the case, Trump v. Barbara, is scheduled for April 1.

Within hours of returning to the Oval Office in January 2025, Trump signed an executive order seeking to change the longstanding legal interpretation of the 14th Amendment, which states, “All 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.”

Trump’s order sought to end birthright citizenship for children born in the U.S. to parents without legal status or temporary visa holders. Lawsuits promptly followed.

Previously, the Supreme Court limited the ability of federal judges to issue nationwide injunctions against the order while litigation over it proceeds, but did not directly address the merits of the order itself.

A series of amicus briefs, sometimes called friend of the court briefs, were filed in either support or opposition to the order. Amicus briefs are filed by groups or individuals who are not a party to the case but have an interest in it, asking the court to consider certain arguments.

One such brief was filed by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops and the Catholic Legal Immigration Network Inc., also known as CLINIC.

Their brief argued they were “motivated by the teachings of the Catholic
Church,” including “the central belief that every person is imbued with an inviolable dignity, and that all human life, created in the image and likeness of God, is sacred.”

“It is through this lens that the Church stands for ‘treating people humanely, treating people with the dignity that they have,'” the brief argued, citing comments made by Pope Leo XIV at Castel Gandolfo Nov. 18, 2025. “These teachings extend to immigrants in the United States without legal status and their American children who were born in the United States.”

“Not only is the principle of birthright citizenship woven into our Nation’s history and Western tradition, but it is also consistent with Catholic teaching,” the brief continued. “Birthright citizenship aligns with the Church’s teaching that humans were created as social beings and that political authority is morally bound to affirm and protect the inherent dignity of every human person in the community. In turn, birthright citizenship reflects the Catholic principle of subsidiarity by recognizing persons as members of the community from birth, thereby enabling their participation in civic life and ensuring that state power serves the human person as a social being.”

The brief concluded that “ending birthright citizenship lacks historical, legal, and moral support.”

“The principle of citizenship by birth is firmly rooted in Western legal tradition, enshrined in the Fourteenth Amendment, and reaffirmed by this Court’s precedent,” it said. “It is equally grounded in Church teachings, which affirms the inherent dignity of every human person, especially the innocent child.”

“As Catholics, our faith compels us to protest laws that deny the dignity of the human person and harm innocent children, particularly when such laws resurrect the very injustices the Fourteenth Amendment was enacted to repudiate,” it added. “At its core, this case is not solely a question about citizenship status or the Fourteenth Amendment. It is a question of whether the law will affirm or deny the equal worth of those born within our common community — whether the law will protect the human dignity of all God’s children.”

A brief in support of the executive order filed by the America First Policy Institute, a think tank that supports Trump-aligned policies, argued, “both the Executive and Legislative branches have broad constitutional authority over matters of immigration and foreign relations and have extensive powers related to national defense and sovereignty.”

“Accordingly, AFPI believes that each branch has the power and the duty to end birthright citizenship for children of illegal aliens, alien tourists, and aliens in the U.S. legally but temporarily,” they argued.

Other amici curiae, or those who filed briefs, included members of Congress, state attorneys general, legal organizations, and immigration policy groups.

Another brief from Evan D. Bernick and Jed H. Shugerman, professors who identified themselves as originalist scholars, argued, “For nearly all of the first 235 years under the Constitution, the citizenship of every child born in the United States to alien parents, with immaterial exceptions, was a given. Then, in 2025, the Trump administration changed course.”

Catholic social teaching on immigration balances three interrelated principles — the right of persons to migrate in order to sustain their lives and those of their families, the right of a country to regulate its borders and control immigration, and a nation’s duty to regulate its borders with justice and mercy.

Read More Immigration & Migration

Radio Interview: The impact of immigration and welcoming the stranger

Traveling ‘Immigrant Crosses’ memorial of ICE-involved deaths launches in Illinois

St. Louis Archdiocese sues over policy barring it from providing sacraments to ICE detainees

San Diego bishop proclaims that ‘faith must speak’ on behalf of immigrants, protect their dignity

Supreme Court temporarily permits third-country deportations as challenge proceeds

McElroy: Americans can no longer ‘pass on by’ ignoring how US is treating immigrants

Copyright © 2026 OSV News

 Print