A Washington federal judge paused nationwide enforcement of President Donald Trump's executive order limiting birthright citizenship on Thursday, calling the order "blatantly unconstitutional" and expressing disdain for attorneys backing the presidential decision while hearing four states' emergency bid for a temporary restraining order.

U.S. District Judge John C. Coughenour ruled from the bench in Seattle federal court, granting the 14-day restraining order sought by Washington, Illinois, Arizona and Oregon in their lawsuit challenging Trump's executive order as a violation of the 14th Amendment.

"I've been on the bench for over four decades, and I can't remember another case where the question presented was this clear," Judge Coughenour said. "This is a blatantly unconstitutional order. Where were the lawyers when this decision was being made?"

"Frankly I have difficulty understanding how a member of the bar could state unequivocally this is a constitutional order," the judge told the federal government's counsel. "It just boggles my mind."

Trump's executive order, "Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship," signed soon after he took office on Monday, stated his administration will not recognize automatic citizenship for any child born in the U.S. whose mother does not have legal authorization to live in the country or whose mother has temporary legal residency status, unless the father is a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident.

The restraining order, which enjoins the federal government and its agencies from taking any action to enforce or implement the executive order, was granted over objections from the U.S. Department of Justice that the policy change doesn't even take effect until Feb. 19.

Signed by the judge as drafted by the plaintiffs' counsel, the court order says Trump's order harms the four states "by forcing state agencies to lose federal funding and incur substantial costs to provide essentially and legally required medical care and social services to resident children" and hurts residents by "depriving them of their constitutional right to citizenship and all the associated rights and benefits."

Washington led the three other states in filing the lawsuit this week, contending the president cannot override the 14th Amendment and the federal Immigration and Nationality Act to unilaterally determine who's entitled to American citizenship.

Another coalition of 18 Democratic-led states has launched a parallel challenge in Massachusetts federal court, and similar cases have been filed by other parties, including one brought in Maryland by immigrant advocacy agencies and five pregnant women whose children would be subject to the executive order.

In a response filed late Wednesday in Washington federal court, the Trump administration argued the 14th Amendment affords birthright citizenship "only to those persons born in the United States and subject to its jurisdiction — and thus excludes children of noncitizens here illegally as well as children of temporary visaholders."

But Judge Coughenour appeared flabbergasted by that stance at Thursday's hearing, pressing the federal government's counsel on the question of constitutionality.

"If any of these children that are subject to this order commit a crime, is it your position that they're not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States?" Judge Coughenour asked.

Acting Assistant Attorney General Brett Shumate of the DOJ's Civil Division, a former Jones Day partner, began to respond by saying that the children would still be subject to the country's laws.

"How about the jurisdiction of the United States?" the judge shot back. "Answer my question."

Shumate reiterated the DOJ's position that the children covered by the order are not entitled to citizenship.

"Respectfully, this issue has not been litigated," he said. "We would ask the court, please, just allow us to brief the issue. I understand that the court is skeptical."

According to the Trump administration's response, the executive order only applies to children born on Feb. 19 or later and gives impacted agencies 30 days to issue guidance on how they intend to take measures to ensure documents recognizing citizenship will only be issued to those who qualify.

"A TRO today is wildly inappropriate and premature because there is no harm," Shumate told the judge. He noted that no other plaintiffs in the parallel legal challenges have rushed to the courts for relief yet, but are instead expected to file preliminary injunction motions that will be fully briefed before being decided.

Assistant Washington State Attorney General Lane Polozola, meanwhile, countered that the defendants "have misread their own executive order," which poses immediate irreparable harm to newborns who will be denied the fundamental "right to have rights" and states whose public programming relies on federal funding contingent upon citizenship.

"Babies are being born today — here in the plaintiff states and around the country — with a cloud cast over their citizenship," Polozola said.

An observer shouted "Yes, judge!" from the back of the packed courtroom when Judge Coughenour concluded the hearing by simply saying that he had signed the temporary restraining order and that a minute order was forthcoming.

At a press conference outside the courthouse following the hearing, Washington State Attorney General Nick Brown said the plaintiff states "are thrilled that the judge issued a temporary restraining order directing the United States government to take no further action in enforcing and implementing the unconstitutional and un-American executive order attempting to eliminate birthright citizenship."

"This is step one. But to hear the judge from the bench say that, in his 40 years as a judge, he has never seen anything so blatantly unconstitutional, sets the tone for the seriousness of this effort," Brown said.

"The seriousness that he expressed really just drove home what we have been saying as state attorneys general for a very long time now, as we looked at the potential of this order, and since the order was issued. This is fairly obvious," Brown added. "So I was not surprised to see Judge Coughenour sort of dismiss the absurdity of the order and the absurdity of the president's action."

Brown noted that Washington, Arizona, Illinois and Oregon will seek a preliminary injunction in the case to ensure the executive order is not enforced while the lawsuit is pending.

Washington is represented by Lane Polozola, Colleen Melody, Daniel Jeon and Alyson Dimmitt Gnam of the Washington State Attorney General's Office.

Arizona is represented by Joshua Bendor, Luci Davis and Gabriela Monico Nunez of the Arizona Attorney General's Office.

Illinois is represented by Rebekah Newman of the Illinois Attorney General's Office.

Oregon is represented by Carla Scott of the Oregon Department of Justice.

The federal government is represented by Brett Shumate, Brad Rosenberg, R. Charlie Merritt and Yuri Fuchs of the U.S. Department of Justice.

The case is State of Washington et al. v. Trump et al., case number 2:25-cv-00127, in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington.

--Additional reporting by Britain Eakin. Editing by Daniel King.

Update: This story has been updated with additional information from the hearing.