A class action lawsuit against the president's plan highlights ongoing judicial conflicts over immigration policy.
Judge Halts Trump's Birthright Citizenship Order Amid Legal Turmoil
Judge Halts Trump's Birthright Citizenship Order Amid Legal Turmoil
A New Hampshire judge issues a temporary block on Trump's executive order.
In a significant legal development, a New Hampshire judge has temporarily blocked President Donald Trump's executive order aimed at ending birthright citizenship for certain individuals in the United States, as legal challenges continue to unfold. This ruling was made alongside a class action lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) on behalf of immigrant parents and their infants.
The class action lawsuit seeks to challenge Trump's order, which the plaintiffs argue violates the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. The 14th Amendment affirms that "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." The president's proposed changes targeted infants born to undocumented immigrants and foreign visitors, as part of a wider immigration enforcement strategy.
Although the Supreme Court recently limited the issuance of universal injunctions, allowing them in specific circumstances, the White House swiftly condemned the judge's ruling. White House spokesperson Harrison Fields described the decision as "an obvious and unlawful attempt to circumvent the Supreme Court's clear order against universal relief," emphasizing the administration's intention to challenge the ruling vigorously.
The New Hampshire judge's decision comes in the wake of the Supreme Court ruling that curbed lower federal judges' authority, although the justices did not address the constitutional validity of the birthright citizenship order itself. Trump's directive had a planned implementation date of July 27, but this ruling once again pauses the controversial order, giving the government seven days to appeal.
Restricting birthright citizenship was among the first of Trump's policy initiatives during his presidency, leading to multiple nationwide injunctions as various courts evaluated the legality of his actions. Despite the Supreme Court's previous support for Trump’s immigration policies, challenges to his executive orders remain persistent, indicating ongoing tensions between judicial authority and executive power concerning immigration.
The class action lawsuit seeks to challenge Trump's order, which the plaintiffs argue violates the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. The 14th Amendment affirms that "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." The president's proposed changes targeted infants born to undocumented immigrants and foreign visitors, as part of a wider immigration enforcement strategy.
Although the Supreme Court recently limited the issuance of universal injunctions, allowing them in specific circumstances, the White House swiftly condemned the judge's ruling. White House spokesperson Harrison Fields described the decision as "an obvious and unlawful attempt to circumvent the Supreme Court's clear order against universal relief," emphasizing the administration's intention to challenge the ruling vigorously.
The New Hampshire judge's decision comes in the wake of the Supreme Court ruling that curbed lower federal judges' authority, although the justices did not address the constitutional validity of the birthright citizenship order itself. Trump's directive had a planned implementation date of July 27, but this ruling once again pauses the controversial order, giving the government seven days to appeal.
Restricting birthright citizenship was among the first of Trump's policy initiatives during his presidency, leading to multiple nationwide injunctions as various courts evaluated the legality of his actions. Despite the Supreme Court's previous support for Trump’s immigration policies, challenges to his executive orders remain persistent, indicating ongoing tensions between judicial authority and executive power concerning immigration.
