New Jersey’s attorney general is one of the Democratic top prosecutors across the country vowing to fight President Donald Trump in court. It didn’t take long for them to make good on the promise. On Tuesday, Attorney General Matthew Platkin joined a group of 20 state and local leaders suing the White House over Trump’s executive action aimed at ending birthright citizenship.
Platkin has been warning that lawsuits may be necessary since Trump’s election. Last week, he joined a group of 14 states readying legal action against the administration to protect health care coverage for Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals recipients.
But the first real legal fight of the second Trump administration appears to be focused on birthright citizenship. Platkin spoke with NOTUS on Tuesday as he prepared to make the formal announcement of his state’s involvement in the suit. This Q&A has been edited for space and clarity.
NOTUS: Why did you choose to pursue birthright citizenship?
Trending
Matthew Platkin: Presidents have a lot of power, but they are not kings. He cannot rewrite the Constitution and the laws of this nation with the stroke of a pen. That’s what he did yesterday, which is something that I think people need to understand is extraordinary and extreme. No president has tried to do this since the Civil War, and it’s hurt our state and hurt our residents. So to me it was very clear that we would stand up and ensure the rule of law is followed.
What is so harmful? Who are you legally saying is harmed by changing birthright citizenship? What actually happens in a place like New Jersey if that happens?
Birthright citizens in this country are entitled to certain privileges, and the state would have to pick up where the federal government would not provide those funds now for people who are really in a class we’ve never had before. Born here, but not citizens. The order didn’t say what they are. It didn’t say what status they have. It just said they will not enjoy the privileges of a citizen. That, again, every American other than in the period of Civil War has been entitled to.
There is this conversation now that maybe you’re putting New Jersey’s federal funds at risk. That maybe this administration is going to turn and try to smack you guys in the face for coming after them. How does the politics of this moment change your job now?
I took an oath that I would uphold the Constitution of this state and this nation. The president, I watched him yesterday take a similar oath, and then a few hours later I watched him sign an executive order that threw out a 157-year-old provision in our Constitution that has been upheld twice by the Supreme Court. So, you know, I think I’m being pretty consistent here. If the president wants to carry out threats against our state, threatening funding because he doesn’t like that, my colleagues and I who are standing up for the rule of law, we’re prepared for that fight too.
Yesterday, one president pardoned his family preemptively. Another president pardoned people who have been convicted by a jury of their peers in the J6 situation. What do you say to people who think this whole thing is just kind of rigged at this point?
I was publicly critical of President Biden’s pardons of his family. When the wealthy and well-connected get treated differently, whoever does it, people see it and it feeds a cynicism about our government that has helped to erode trust in our institutions and the people that serve them. When I say we stand up for the rule of law, we mean it. That is the prism I look at every issue through.
You’ve been preparing for Jan. 20 for a while. You’ve been talking about what was coming. Now it has come. Does it feel like what you expected, or different, or what?
President Trump was very clear about what his administration would do if elected. … They were very clear about what his administration would do once they took office, and they’re acting on those promises. But we’ve prepared and we’ve reviewed those promises to assess, again, not whether we have a personal disagreement but whether they are consistent with the Constitution and laws of this nation. So, no, I can’t say I’m surprised because this is something we’ve talked about. But that doesn’t make it any less extraordinary, or less extreme, or less unprecedented. That’s why I’m confident that as the courts review this and actions that similarly violate the law, we will prevail.
—
Evan McMorris-Santoro is a reporter at NOTUS.
Author
