Trump's "desperate end around" the Supreme Court with new attack on birthright citizenship; civil rights groups vow to fight back

SCREEN CAPTURE / YOUTUBE

The ACLU's Cecilia Wang defended birthright citiznship at the Supreme Court.

Just five weeks after getting slapped down by the nation’s highest court, the Trump regime is launching a fresh offensive in its ongoing war against immigrants and who gets to be an "American."

On August 6, Donald Trump signed two new executive orders targeting birthright citizenship. The move is a transparent attempt to bypass the 14th Amendment by creating a tiered system of citizenship and labeling specific foreign individuals — a move civil rights advocates are calling a desperate end run around constitutional law.

Trump's overly broad Day 1 executive order was decisively struck down in a 6-3 Supreme Court ruling (Trump v. Barbara) issued last June. Now, the White House is trying a narrower, more insidious approach.

Round Two: The new executive orders

Trump’s latest strategy splits the policy into two surgical strikes designed to test the limits of executive power:

The first order carves out citizenship exclusions, dictating that children born on U.S. soil to foreign diplomats, embassy staff, designated "alien enemies," or parents accused of immigration fraud will no longer receive automatic citizenship. It also lays the groundwork to strip birthright citizenship in US territories if Congress provides legislative backing.

The second order commands federal agencies to actively block "birth tourism" by tightening visa restrictions on pregnant foreign visitors and preventing agencies from issuing travel visas under those conditions.

White House immigration henchman Stephen Miller and regime enablers maintain they are on firm legal footing, banking on the idea that regulating visas and defining national security terminology falls under executive authority over immigration.

Civil rghts groups fire back

The backlash from civil rights organizations was instantaneous, fierce, and unified across the progressive ecosystem. Advocates warning that these directives seek to create a vulnerable, unprotected legal class were quick to point out that a president cannot simply rewrite the supreme law of the land.

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) whose top attorney Cecilia Wang successfully argued against the regime's lawyers before the Supreme Court in Trump v. Barbara, joined the fight, promising that this latest piece of executive overreach will meet the exact same fate in federal court as the last one. 

“The Supreme Court already decided this issue: Birthright citizenship is guaranteed by the Constitution," said Cody Wofsy, deputy director of the ACLU’s Immigrants’ Rights Project. "No additional executive order can change the meaning of the Constitution. Any executive order that tries to rewrite birthright citizenship will meet the same fate as the last one.”

The Asian Law Caucus (ALC), co-counsel in Trump v. Barbara and the nation’s first Asian American legal and civil rights organization, issued a blistering condemnation. Executive Director Aarti Kohli stated:

“This is a cynical distraction from a flailing administration – and AAPI and immigrant families would pay the price. The Constitution – as the Supreme Court already affirmed in June – does not allow the government to pick and choose which children born in this country belong. This is a desperate end run around the Court’s decision based on made-up legal theories. The administration already lost once and it will lose again.

“Asian Law Caucus fought this administration’s attacks on birthright citizenship from day one. Our work carries forward the legacy of Fred Korematsu, whose family, like thousands of Japanese Americans, was branded a so-called “alien enemy” in 1942 and whose conviction we helped overturn in 1983. Today’s unlawful orders revive that same label to decide which babies count as American. Our commitment is clear: we will continue to defend birthright citizenship and protect the AAPI and immigrant families these actions target.”

Frontline community reactions

The ACLU and Asian Law Caucus were not alone in quickly condemning Trump's newest executive orders.

Stop AAPI Hate Coalition: The advocacy network warned that the administration’s new directives will explicitly fuel racial profiling, visa discrimination, and xenophobia. Representatives from the Stop AAPI Hate Action Center noted that drawing arbitrary lines around which parents "belong" invites dangerous local scrutiny for anyone who looks or sounds Asian, regardless of their actual legal status.

APIAVote: Leading voting rights and civic engagement groups stressed that the administration's "made-up legal theories" are a desperate play to suppress the growing political power and demographic footprint of communities of color.

Asian Americans Advancing Justice: Legal and civil rights affiliates expressed outrage that the executive branch is trying to overrule a definitive, weeks-old Supreme Court ruling. They criticized the orders as a "cynical distraction" meant to instill fear in immigrant neighborhoods, discourage families from seeking medical care, and disrupt local communities.

Birthright citizenship is simply defined in the US Constitution.

View from the edge

For Asian American, Pacific Islander (AAPI), and immigrant communities, resurrecting the term "alien enemies" isn't just an abstract legal debate — it is a visceral echo of historical exclusion acts and wartime targeting.

From the bedrock protection secured in 1898 by a Chinese American in United States v. Wong Kim Ark to the dark chapter of World War II internment, marginalized communities have had to repeatedly defend their right to belong. Drawing arbitrary lines around which parents "belong" invites dangerous racial profiling and xenophobia for anyone who looks or sounds foreign, regardless of their actual legal status.

Legal experts agree that while the White House is attempting to use narrower, security-focused language to dodge judicial review, denying citizenship to any child born on US soil directly violates the 14th Amendment's Citizenship Clause. Activists, civil rights coalitions, and legal teams are already preparing their briefs to halt the implementation of these orders before they can take root.

No matter how many executive orders the White House drafts, the fundamental law of the land remains unchanged. Trump just doesn't get it. He's not a king.

EDITOR'S NOTE: For additional commentary, news, views and chismis from an AANHPI perspective, follow me on Threads, on X, BlueSky or at the blog Views From the Edge. If you find this perspective interesting, please share.

Trump’s unfounded claims of China election meddling spark fear in Chinese American community

Donald Trump used unsubstantionated 

Oh no! He didn't. But he did. Donald Trump blamed China for interfering with US elections. Here we go again.

Trump is reviving his greatest hits of grievance, but this time, the needle is dropping on a track that has the Chinese American community bracing for impact. Without offering a shred of proof, Trump is now claiming that Beijing meddled in the 2020 election, explicitly accusing China of "stealing voter files." He just can't accept that he lost that year.

Trump's intent is clear. If you need a bogeyman as a distraction, blame China or immigrants. In Trump's primetime address July16, he blamed both.

“We have seen this playbook before," said the Asian  Law Caucus Executive Director Aarti Kohli. "Time and again, the Trump administration has sought to cast doubt on our elections and the Americans who get to participate in them. We’ve seen it recently with his renewed pressure on Congress to pass the SAVE Act, a bill with the clear intent to see fewer people vote."

While US intelligence agencies have already thoroughly rejected these allegations and Beijing has called them entirely fabricated, the damage in our current political climate doesn't require facts to do real-world harm. For Chinese Americans, the rhetoric feels dangerously familiar — and terrifying.

Trump also used the occasion to claim 250,000 noncitizens took part in the 2020 vote although there is no evidence to back that claim. State attorneys general, even those of GOP-controlled states like Florida and Texas, have had to reduce initial claims of thousands of noncitizen voters to only a handful after further investigation.

The immediate fallout: Fear and defensiveness

Community advocates and leaders are already sounding the alarm over what this baseless finger-pointing will mean on the ground. The consensus is clear: when Washington targets Beijing, it’s Asian Americans who pay the price on the street.

“Our research this year found that a majority of Americans believe the rhetoric used by President Trump about China and US-China relations has a negative impact on the treatment of Chinese Americans,” said Paul Cheung, president of the Committee of 100, a group of prominent Chinese Americans created when Trump's "China Initiative" began targeting Chinese and Chinese Americansresearchers and academics.

SHUTTERSTOCK

Anti-Asian hate has surged since the pandemic and hasn't gone away.

Activists in the Asian American community are bracing for a multi-front wave of repercussions:

A resurgence of xenophobia: Just as the "Chinese virus" rhetoric of the early 2020s directly triggered a terrifying surge in anti-Asian hate crimes, community leaders fear this new political scapegoating will paint a target on the backs of Chinese Americans once again.

Civic chilling effect: The fallout is already hitting everyday community participation. Volunteers and campaign workers—like Elaine Peng, who has led Chinese American grassroots efforts—worry that ungrounded political suspicion will make everyday citizens terrified to engage in the democratic process, fearing they’ll be labeled as foreign agents.

The "perpetual foreigner" Trap: Trump's rhetoric repeated by his army of minions, reinforces the toxic stereotype that Chinese Americans are inherently loyal to a foreign power rather than their own home, eroding decades of civil rights progress.

The Feds' verdict: No infrastructure breaches, no flipped votes

The US intelligence community has completely debunked the idea that China manipulated the 2020 ballot box.

A sweeping, unclassified intelligence assessment concluded there is absolutely zero evidence that any foreign adversary modified a single ballot, altered voter registrations, or compromised vote tabulations.

While it is true that Chinese entities compiled data on roughly 220 million Americans, analysts from platforms like PBS NewsHour quickly pointed out the boring truth. This information wasn't stolen via cyberwarfare; it was legally bought and downloaded from ordinary commercial marketing sites and public databases. It is information accessible by any Tom, Dick or Harry.

There was a minor split in the intelligence community, with one cyber official suggesting Beijing used basic social media posturing to sour public opinion on Trump. However, even that dissenting view explicitly stated there was no information suggesting China tried to interfere directly with the election mechanics.

Because the American voting infrastructure is intentionally decentralized across thousands of local, disconnected jurisdictions, county by county, state by state, national security experts reiterate that a centralized cyberattack capable of flipping an election outcome is practically impossible.

View from the edge

Let’s be completely clear: US intelligence has found no evidence supporting these claims. But in an election season where anti-China sentiment is standard currency for both sides of the aisle, Trump’s latest baseless accusations are throwing gasoline on an already volatile fire.

Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Lin Jian wasted no time labeling Trump’s claims as "pure fabrication" and political mudslinging designed to stir up voters ahead of the election cycle.

“I hope every American is seeing what is happening right before our eyes: The Trump Administration is flinging desperate and unsubstantiated attacks on our elections," says the Asian Law Caucus' Kohli, "Trump forced himself on your TVs and phone screens trying to undermine your confidence in the integrity of our elections in real time. But we won’t let it happen."

For the Asian American community, specifically Chinese Americans — the fear isn't abstract — it's a matter of daily safety, civic survival, and demanding that political leaders stop using an entire diaspora as a political football.

The data proves the claims are empty political theater. But as Asian Americans, we know the danger isn't the validity of the conspiracy — it's how easily the rhetoric turns our neighbors into targets.

EDITOR'S NOTE: For additional commentary, news, views and chismis from an AANHPI perspective, follow me on Threads, on X, BlueSky or at the blog Views From the Edge. If you find this perspective interesting, please repost.

Republicans celebrate dismantling of the Voting Rights Act by launching redistricting in 7 southern states

April 29, 2026 was one of the worst days for American democracy. Over 60 years of voting rights dismantled and dismissed.

Watch out. After the conservative majority in the US Supreme Court’s destruction of the Voting Rights Act, Republicans are wasting no time in trying to wrest away Congressional districts from Black voters.

On April 29, the Supreme Court 6-3 decision in Louisiana v. Callais significantly weakened Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act (VRA), limiting the use of race in creating majority-minority districts.

“For decades, the Voting Rights Act has helped ensure that communities of color have a fair opportunity to make their voices heard at the ballot box,” said Christine Chen, Executive Director of APIAVote. The Supreme Court “decision weakens one of the most important remaining safeguards against discrimination in our electoral system and threatens the progress that so many communities have fought hard to achieve. Today’s decision will make it easier for politicians to draw voting districts that let them choose their voters rather than empowering voters to choose their elected officials. ”

As of early 2025, In the 119th Congress there is a record number of 67 Black lawmakers serving in the 119th Congress, according to Spectrum News. This total includes 62 Democrats and five Republicans, with 62 serving in the House of Representatives and five in the Senate, marking the highest representation in US history. 

Currently, here are 15 congressional districts where Black voters make up a majority of the voting-age population. Each of these districts is currently represented by a Black Democrat.

According to an analysis by Fair Fight Action and Black Voters Matter, the Callais ruling could eventually lead to a redistricting wave down in Dixie that could help Republicans flip as many as 19 majority-minority seats currently held by Democrats.

While majority-Black districts have historically been the primary vehicle for Black representation, most Black members of Congress now represent districts where Black voters are not the majority.

Although the main target was Black majority districts in the South, the SCOTUS ruling could also be used against Asian Americans or Latinos not only for Congressional districts but also local jurisdictions like school districts, cities and counties.

The districts which are vulnerable under the SCOTUS ruling  could be gerrymandered GOP controlled states in order to maintain their control of Congress. Because of Donald Trump's record-breaking unpopularity due to his dismal economic record, his harsh immigration policies, rising healthcare costs and his war against Iran.

According to Democracy Docket, while SCOTUS said redistricting based on race was illegal,  political gerrymandering is OK. The GOP is celebrating and wasting no time in implementing the court's astonishing decision.

• Alabama: Gov. Kay Ivey (R) called a special session to reinstate the state’s old gerrymander before the midterms — pending a greenlight from SCOTUS. 
  
  
• Louisiana: The state successfully suspended its US House primaries. There are already three lawsuits against the state for halting its active election and nullifying votes.
  
  
• Tennessee: In a move that may eliminate its one blue congressional seat and disenfranchise Black voters, Tennessee is now seeking to redistrict mid-cycle.
  
  
• South Carolina: Lawmakers and the state GOP have urged the governor to call for a special session to mid-cycle redistrict. 
  
  
• Georgia: The governor has said he won’t call a special session to redraw for 2026, but as we saw after Alabama’s 180, that could change.
  
  
• Florida: We’re waiting for Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis to sign the recently passed gerrymandered map. 
  
  
• Virginia: The Republican National Committee is appealing its loss in a third challenge to Virginia's 10-1 congressional map approved by voters last month.
  

There is a justifiable fear is that the SCOTUS decision will have a trickle down effect and affect local  legislative districts in the states and our AANHPI communities that have only recently been able to elect representatives that reflect them.

“When the Voting Rights Act is undermined, Black voters are harmed first. But the damage won’t stop there. The Supreme Court has gutted one of the last protections we have against racial discrimination in our democracy. It puts the political power of Asian Americans and communities of color at risk," said Asian Law Caucus' Executive Director Aarti Kohli.

"It leaves communities of color with fewer enforceable protections against unfair maps — and not just for Congress, but in state and local elections across the country. We stand with Black and Brown voters from Louisiana to every state where maps could now be redrawn to limit their voice," Kohli continued.

“The same protections that safeguard the voice of Black voters are the same ones that protect Asian Americans, immigrants, and language-minority communities. This decision is not isolated. It is the latest in a sustained assault on the right of communities of color to participate fully in our democracy. We will not let our rights be taken without a fight — in the courts, in our legislatures, and at the ballot box, together.”

EDITOR'S NOTE: For additional commentary, news, views and chismis from an AANHPI perspective, follow me on Threads, on X, BlueSky or at the blog Views From the Edge. If you find this perspective interesting, please repost.

 

Radical US Supreme Court eviscerates the Voting Rights Act

Communities of color will have a harder time electing one of their own after the SCOTUS ruling.

It’s a dark day for American democracy. In a move that feels like a punch to the gut for those fighting for a seat at the table, the Supreme Court has once again signaled that the Voting Rights Act is more of a suggestion than a shield.

The Court’s 6-3 decision Wednesday in Louisiana v. Callais — decided along the usual ideological fault lines — handed a win to those who want to keep the status quo, and a major loss to the AAPI and Black communities who are just looking for a fair shake in the voting booth.

The 6-3 vote was predictable. The conservative GOP majority ruled again putting personal idealogy above precedent. Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett were in the majority overwhelming Justices Elena Kagel, Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson.

Writing for the majority, Justice Alito essentially argued that Louisiana’s attempt to create a second majority-Black district relied too heavily on race. In the eyes of the conservative wing, trying to fix racial underrepresentation is, ironically, unconstitutional racial stereotyping.

'Colorblind' means blind to reality

We know what this means. Whether it’s the Vietnamese American hubs in the Gulf Coast or the Chinese and Filipino communities in Houston and Atlanta, or the South Asian suburbs in Silicon Valley, it means the Court has given a green light to map-makers to slice and dice our communities until our collective voice is just a whisper. As the dissenters noted, when you stop looking at race in a country where race still defines the political landscape, you aren’t being "colorblind"—you’re just being blind to reality.

Kagan argued that the majority is creating a "Catch-22" for states. If they don't consider race, they violate the Voting Rights Act; if they do, the Court strikes it down as a racial gerrymander.

The dissenters warned that this ruling makes it nearly impossible for minority communities — including our rapidly growing AAPI neighborhoods — to prove that their votes are being diluted. By making the legal bar so high, the Court is effectively telling these communities: "Your growth doesn't equal power."

“The consequences will extend far beyond Louisiana. Asian Americans are the fastest growing racial group in the country, and we are growing fastest in the South, where today’s decision gives legislators the most cover to draw us out of political power that our communities are fighting hard to build," states Asian Law Caucus' Executive Director Aarti Kohli.

“When the Voting Rights Act is undermined, Black voters are harmed first. But the damage won’t stop there. The Supreme Court has gutted one of the last protections we have against racial discrimination in our democracy. It puts the political power of Asian Americans and communities of color at risk," Kohli continued.

By making it harder to use the VRA to protect minority districts, the Court has given a green light to map-makers to slice and dice our communities until our collective voice is just a whisper. As the dissenters noted, when you stop looking at race in a country where race still defines the political landscape, you aren’t being "colorblind"—you’re just being blind to reality.

What does this mean for the 2026 midterms and beyond? For our community, it’s all about the "Cracking," a gerrymandering tactic that splits a cohesive group of voters (based on political party, race, or community interest) across multiple districts to dilute their voting power. By dividing this population, the group becomes a minority in each district, preventing them from electing their preferred candidates.

By making it nearly impossible to challenge maps that divide our growing populations in Texas, Georgia, and Florida, the Court is essentially trying to keep the "bamboo ceiling" firmly attached to the halls of power. When you divide a vibrant AAPI neighborhood across three different districts, you ensure that our specific needs—from language access to anti-hate legislation—never get a champion in Congress.

In California where a quarter of AAPIs in the US reside, the biggest immediate risk is at the city and county levels (like in San Jose, Oakland, or Los Angeles), where "Chinatowns" or "Little Saigons" can be split between districts to dilute their influence.

“We see what this means in practice: communities are unfairly split for partisan gains. A Chinatown carved between three districts," says the Asian Law Caucus. "That is how political power is taken — by design, with impunity, and now with the Supreme Court’s blessing. It means communities of color end up represented by politicians who don’t look like them, don’t know them, and don’t have to listen to them."

AAPI voters are currently considered "influential" in six of California’s 52 congressional districts. The ruling makes it harder to defend these lines if they are challenged as being "too racial" rather than "partisan."

View from the edge

The ruling in Louisiana v. Callais is just the latest blow in a nearly 15-year calculated  campaign by the Roberts Court and the powers that put them on the bench, to dismantle the Voting Rights Act. Legal experts and civil rights leaders often describe this as "death by a thousand cuts."

There is hope because some states -- like California and New York -- are crafting their own Voting Rights Acts but there is already a target on these laws. The conservative wing of the SCOTUS is already signaling that if these state laws focus "too much" on race to fix representation, they might strike those down, too.

So, what does this mean for the 2026 midterms and beyond? For our community, it’s all about the "Cracking," a gerrymandering tactic that splits a cohesive group of voters (based on political party, race, or community interest) across multiple districts to dilute their voting power. By dividing this population, the group becomes a minority in each district, preventing them from ever electing the candidates who might best represent their common interests and perspective.

By making it nearly impossible to challenge maps that divide our growing populations in Texas, Georgia, and Florida, the Court is essentially trying to keep the "bamboo ceiling" firmly attached to the halls of power. When you divide a vibrant AAPI neighborhood across three different districts, you ensure that our specific needs—from language access to anti-hate legislation—never get a champion in Congress.

EDITOR'S NOTE: For additional commentary, news, views and chismis from an AANHPI perspective, follow me on Threads, on X, BlueSky or at the blog Views From the Edge. 

ICE on a rampage, arresting, detaining, deporting Asian American veterans

'We expect to see a dramatic increase in the number of Asians arrested in the latter half of 2025'

SEARAC

Southeast Asian Americans protest deportations targeting their community.

Its crazy. US military veterans who fought for their country are not immune from the out-of-control agents of Immigration and Customs Enforcement trying to meet a "quota" mandated by Donald Trump officials.

A recent report from UCLA Asian American and Pacific Islander Policy Initiative. found that arrests of Asian immigrants by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) more than tripled between 2024 and mid-2025. Enforcement actions have included workplace raids, such as one at a Hyundai plant in Georgia where over 300 Korean nationals were arrested.

Recent news from ICE raises concerns regarding non-citizen military veterans and Southeast Asian refugees who served with US forces during the Vietnam War, or as the Vietnamese government calls the "American War."

The situation is worse for some AAPI than others. Hmong and Laotian allies, who aided US forces during that conflict, have come under scrutiny. 

Reports indicate detentions for deportation, with 16 individuals arrested in Michigan in July and August 2025 based on older criminal records. Advocacy groups and state legislators have highlighted their service, but the federal government's focus on immigration enforcement, no matter how harsh, appears to continue.

State Representative Mai Xiong, Michigan's first Hmong American legislator, said in a Facebook video that many of the detainees had never been to Laos, having been born in refugee camps in other countries, or had been brought to the US as children.

        RELATED: 

• Hundreds of highly-skilled South Koreans arrested by ICE
• Man hangs himself while in ICE detention
• Immigration is the wedge; ending democracy is the goal

Xiong is the wife of Wa Kong Lor, one of the detained immigrants, read a statement during a press conference: "This appeared to be a targeted operation, an easy way for ICE officers to detain people without going to their homes."

"My husband, like many others that day, was taken without warning," she said.

This issue is not new. Earlier this year, the US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) rescinded a policy that generally allowed pre-1995 immigrants to remain in the country, leading to a significant increase in deportations. The Trump administration previously increased deportations of Southeast Asian refugees, sometimes for offenses committed years prior.

With policies indicating military service does not automatically prevent deportation, ICE has continued to act on these cases. Many have lived with final removal orders for years, in uncertainty because their countries of origin initially did not accept them back. However, US pressure is reportedly leading these nations to change their policies, increasing vulnerability for these refugees.

Concerns also extend to non-citizen military veterans and their families, with increased detentions by ICE reported since 2025. Examples provided include:

• A veteran reportedly detained without a warrant during a raid.

• An Army veteran and U.S. citizen allegedly subjected to tear gas and pepper spray during a raid despite identifying himself.

• A disabled veteran with a green card reportedly detained during a routine citizenship interview.

The Department of Homeland Security highlighted an individual who falsely claimed US military service, which some view as an attempt to justify enforcement actions.

Advocates suggest that many veterans facing deportation are being targeted for long-past offenses, sometimes linked to untreated service-related trauma.

For now, groups like the Asian Law Caucus and the Southeast Asia Resource Action Center (SEARAC) are fighting on the front lines, and legislation like the Southeast Asian Deportation Relief Act (SEADRA) is in the works. It's a small spark of hope in an otherwise dark time. But it's not enough. We need to do more. And we need to hold our leaders accountable for this disgraceful treatment of those who once served this nation.

And it appears that the situation will get worse  for AAPI communities as the Trump administration feels emboldened on the issue. In the first half of 2025, nationals from China, India, Vietnam, Laos, and Nepal accounted for 80% of Asian arrests.

"We expect to see a dramatic increase in the number of Asians arrested in the latter half of 2025. This will be driven by the Trump administration’s e�fort to ramp up the number of ICE arrests exponentially to reach its target of one million deportations per year," concludes the UCLA study.

"So far, ICE arrests have disproportionately impacted and harmed Latino communities, who have been subjected to extensive racial profiling. This will likely change because Asians are 16% of the estimated number of undocumented immigrants and 25% of the non-citizen immigrants, but they made up less than 3% of those arrested during the first few months of the Trump Administration," the UCLA analysis concludes. "The predicted increase may very well be accompanied by a resurgence in anti-Asian xenophobia."

News reports say the Trump administration has set a quota system for ICE detentions and deportations. Initially Trump explained that his administration would target violent criminals for deportation but as in order to meet the reported quota, federal agents have been arresting legal residents as they report to immigration courts, rounding up suspects in church, schools and at their jobs. 

The recent Supreme Court ruling allowing racial profiling so that federal agents to arrest anyone that looks like, sounds like or suspected of being an illegal immigrant broadens ICE powers will broaden the pool of people that can be arrested.

Any belief by conservative Asians and Asian Americans who voted for Trump that they are immune to his administration's racist immigration policies is a fantasy and should be put to rest.

EDITOR'S NOTE: For additional commentary, news, views and chismis from an AANHPI perspective, follow me on Threads, on X, BlueSky or at the blog Views From the Edge. 

Judge blocks Trump's attempt to ignore the US Constitution and do away with birthright citizenship

ABC News graphic

The ACLU filed a lawsuit in behalf of children born in the United States.

A federal court has blocked Donald Trump's executive order restricting birthright citizenship, a major component of his administration's anti-immigrant campaign that has been described as racist and un-American.

US District Judge Joseph Laplante, who was appointed by former President Bush, on Thursday blocked Donald Trump’s assault on birthright citizenship in a ruling that applies nationwide.

“Since the Supreme Court’s decision, parents have lived in fear and uncertainty, wondering whether they should give birth in a different state, whether their newborns would be subject to deportation, and what kind of future awaits their children,” said Aarti Kohli, executive director of Asian Law Caucus.

“This court’s injunction protecting birthright citizenship for all affected children is a major victory for families across this country and for all Americans. This ruling reaffirms that constitutional rights cannot be stripped away by executive decree.”

The ruling in Barbara v. Donald J. Trump stems from a nationwide class-action lawsuit filed June 27, immediately after a Supreme Court ruling that potentially opened the door for partial enforcement of the executive order.

The Asian Law Caucus is part of the coalition of legal rights organizations that filed the suit, including the American Civil Liberties Union, ACLU of New Hampshire, ACLU of Maine, ACLU of Massachusetts, Legal Defense Fund, and Democracy Defenders Fund

The legal challenge was filed on behalf of a proposed class of babies subject to the executive order. It seeks to protect all impacted families in the country in the wake of the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Trump v. CASA, which directed courts to consider narrowing nationwide protection that had been provided in the first round of challenges to the executive order attacking birthright citizenship.

In granting the request, the court provided for a 7-day delay so that the government — which argued to the Supreme Court that a nationwide class was the appropriate way to seek nationwide protection in the birthright cases — could nevertheless try to get the First Circuit Court of Appeals to stay the relief, if it decides to pursue that option. Even with a 7-day delay, the ruling will go into effect well before July 27, when partial implementation of the unconstitutional order might otherwise have begun.

Birthright citizenship is a right guaranteed by the 14th Amendment of the Constitution. The language of the amendment is clear: “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.”

As soon as Trump took office, one of his first actions was to issue an executive order challenging the 14th Amendment. Several courts have upheld birthright citizenship and issued injunctions against any actions the Trump administration might undertake against the courts' ruling.

RELATED:

• Chinese American case set precedent for birthright citizenship
• FilAm AG files suit against Trump's executive order on birthright citizenship

The Department of Justice, acting in behalf of Trump, went to the activist conservative US Supreme Court challenging the right of lower courts to issue nationwide injunctions. Last week, SCOTUS, ruled 6-3 along party lines agiainst the lower courts' ability to issue nationwide orders, saying the judges' injunctions would apply only the judges' jurisdictions, not nationally. In their ruling, the SCOTUS majority agreed with the DOJ attorneys who argued to the Supreme Court that a nationwide class was the appropriate way to seek nationwide protection in the birthright cases.

“I am appalled by the Supreme Court’s decision to let the Trump administration push forward with its unconstitutional attempt to eliminate birthright citizenship," Rep. Grace Meng, chair of the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus, said after the SCOTUS decision. "This reckless ruling opens the door to a future where states can decide who is an American citizen.

“The 14th Amendment guarantees citizenship to anyone born on U.S. soil—a principle upheld by this very Court over a century ago. Instead of ruling on the merits of this case, the Court has chosen to undermine judges’ abilities to block the administration’s unlawful actions that will only lead to more chaos and division.

The SCOTUS ruling spurred legal advocates like the ACLU, Asian Law Caucus to rile class action suit with affected clients in every state in the Union, thus going around the Justices' ruling.

With the judge's decision, other lawsuits against Trump's order are amending their complaints into class action lawsuits.

“The Asian American community has been at the forefront of affirming birthright citizenship ever since the landmark case of U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark," stated a Asian Americans Advancing Justice. "Together with the Washington Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights and Urban Affairs (WLC) and OCA – Asian Pacific American Advocates (OCA), we have amended our own lawsuit challenging President Trump's executive order, OCA — Asian Pacific American Advocates v. Rubio, to proceed as a class action."

“This ruling is a huge victory and will help protect the citizenship of all children born in the United States, as the Constitution intended,” said Cody Wofsy, deputy director of the ACLU’s Immigrants’ Rights Project, who argued the case. “We are fighting to ensure President Trump doesn’t trample on the citizenship rights of one single child.”

EDITOR'S NOTE: For additional commentary, news, views and chismis from an AANHPI perspective, follow me on Threads, on X or at the blog Views From the Edge. Now on BlueSky.

 

California county rescinds ordinance limiting water for Asian American landowners

INSTAGRAM

 Asian Americans celebrated after Siskiyou County rescinded its water ordinances.

A rural northern California county has repealed two ordinances that restricted water use and delivery near predominantly Hmong communities, ostensibly to crack down on illegal marijuana farming. 

Two years after Siskiyou County enacted a series of targeted ordinances that deprived thousands of Hmong American, Chinese American, and other Asian American residents of basic water for survival, hygiene, and wildfire defense, community members secured an important milestone this week in their fight to build a home, live safely, and raise their families without fear of bigotry and racist persecution by local officials.

As of August 1, 2023, Siskiyou County has repealed two of its water ordinances that created a humanitarian crisis for Asian American residents, degraded their health, resulted in the loss of livestock and gardens, left people unable to fend off wildfires, and forced many to leave their homes.

The county also amended a third water ordinance to establish due process protections and limit violation fines that discouraged people from providing water.

All Siskiyou County residents, including those in Shasta Vista, Dorris, and Macdoel, can now lawfully bring water to their homes via trucks and purchase water for basic needs from neighboring large well owners.

“Today, we celebrate an important victory affirming our human right to water and our rights to live without oppressive fear and trauma, simply because of where we were born or what we look like.” said ”Siskiyou County resident Russell Mathis.

Lawsuits vs. SIskiyou

These measures came after a settlement in Lo v. Siskiyou County, led by 11 Siskiyou County residents who were denied basic water needs as part of the county’s well-documented campaign of harassment, discrimination, and racial profiling against Asian American community members.

A federal court ordered the county to stop enforcement of two water ordinances to prevent the “dehydration and de facto expulsion of a disfavored minority” in 2021. In 2022, the federal judge ruled against the county’s attempts to end this preliminary injunction, noting “the passage of time has erased neither the concerning language County officials used to describe their purposes nor the racial animosity Hmong people in Shasta Vista have faced.”

The Lo plaintiffs were represented by the law offices of Allison B. Margolin, PLC and Frank S. Moore, APC. The Asian Law Caucus and the ACLU of Northern California filed briefs in support of the Lo plaintiffs’ lawsuit, showing that Siskiyou County’s discriminatory practices extended beyond water, including racial profiling in traffic stops and the use of punitive liens.

In August 2022, Asian American community members filed a major class action lawsuit against Siskiyou County officials and the Siskiyou Sheriff’s Department for their sweeping racial persecution campaign. In this case, Chang v. Siskiyou County, community members and their attorneys at the ACLU Foundation of Northern California, Asian Law Caucus, and Covington & Burling LLP detailed how county officials restrict people’s right to water and execute unlawful traffic stops, search and seizure practices, and property liens in a blatant effort to isolate residents of Asian descent and drive them out of the region.

Just as community members led a settlement in Lo v. Siskiyou County to restore their right to water, community members leading the Chang v. Siskiyou County class action lawsuit are currently in settlement negotiations to resolve claims of racial discrimination.

“As the Asian American community in Siskiyou has grown, including more parents enrolling their kids in school, grandparents retiring to more rural areas that remind them of Laos, and families trying to be closer together, Siskiyou County and the Sheriff’s Department have gone to troubling lengths to push out the Asian American community, and community members are taking action to create a safe, inclusive place to live,” said John Do, senior staff attorney for the Racial & Economic Justice Program at the ACLU of Northern California.

The discriminatory practices came through acts of intimidation including unlawful traffic stops and illegal search and seizure practices.

In a county where US Census figures showed that Asian and Pacific Islanders adults made up only about 2.4% of the adult population, more than 28% of traffic stops conducted by sheriff’s deputies last year involved Asian American drivers, according to the complaint.

The plaintiffs' lawyers said their investigation found that sheriff’s deputies stopped drivers of Asian descent at a rate of roughly 12 times greater than their proportion of the driving-age population, with Asian American drivers about 17 times more likely to be pulled over than a white individual.

The northern California county in the shadow of Mt. Shasta is home to fewer than 45,000 people, of whom 85% are white and 1.6% are Asian American, according to the 2020 Census. Many Asian American residents in Siskiyou County are Hmong and came to the US as refugees after fighting alongside the U.S. military in the Vietnam War. 

Marijuana growing

The county claimed the ordinances were necessary and primarily aimed at illegal marijuana agriculture. Growing cannabis has been legal in California since 2018, but Siskiyou’s regulations have made it nearly impossible to grow legally, according to Prism. The county does not classify marijuana-growing as an agricultural therefore criminalizing growing the plant.

However, many Hmong and Chinese community members, who are part of the county’s farming population, said the measures were largely enforced in Asian American areas, the lawsuits allege. 

“If the sheriff was really concerned about cannabis, there would be all kinds of enforcement going on throughout the county, and there’s very little in the non-Hmong areas,” said Glenn Katon, an attorney with Asian Americans Advancing Justice – Asian Law Caucus in an interview with Prism.

White people have grown cannabis in Siskiyou since at least the late ‘60s without much incident, according to Margiana Petersen-Rockney, who co-published ethnographic research on cannabis farmers in the county.

In the mid-2010s, Hmong Americans started to arrive. The cheap parcels of land and mountainous landscape drew many Hmong elders from the Hmong communities in Minnesota and Fresno, Calif. The mountains and rural setting reminded them of Laos and their agricultural roots.

The tension grew between the county and its newest residents when four officers from different agencies, including the sheriff's department, fired 60 shots and killed Soobleej Kaub Hawj, a local farmer, who was attempting to bring water to the area. Authorities say he brandished a gun.

“The county kept insisting the case was about cannabis,” the ACLU's Do told Prism. “(The county’s officials) spoke as if everyone was part of a violent drug cartel essentially, and I think that language is indicative of how they’ve been treated.”

Siskiyou County’s water ordinances is the latest example of a long history of racist water policies used to target Black, Latino, and other communities of color and uphold segregation in California, particularly in unincorporated communities in the San Joaquin Valley, and in other states across the country.

“Siskiyou County’s bigoted practices draw from a long history of US policies treating people of Asian descent as less than full Americans who ‘don’t belong’ in our country, picking and choosing who has the freedom to build better lives and live safely,” said Glenn Katon, litigation director for the Asian Law Caucus. 

After the ordinances were repealed last week, Siskiyou resident Matis said: “My neighbors and I have been forced to make impossible choices between bathing every week and providing water to our pets, livestock, and gardens. County officials said they wanted to ‘choke’ us out, and these water ordinances were one tool in a shameful playbook to push so many of us out of the neighborhoods we call home.” 

EDITOR'S NOTE: For additional commentary, news and views from an AANHPI perspective, follow me at Threads.net/eduardodiok, @DioknoEd on Twitter or at the  blog Views From the Edge.