Federal Judge Blocks Trump Administration’s Attempt to End Birthright Citizenship
A federal judge in New Hampshire issued a preliminary injunction on Thursday, August 1, blocking the Trump administration’s executive order seeking to end birthright citizenship for children born to parents living in the U.S. illegally or temporarily. The judge announced his intention to certify a class action lawsuit encompassing all children potentially affected by the order, marking a significant legal challenge to the policy.
The lawsuit, filed on behalf of pregnant women, parents, and their infants, challenges the January executive order that aimed to deny citizenship to those born in the United States whose parents lack legal immigration status. Represented by the American Civil Liberties Union and other legal advocates, the plaintiffs argue the order violates the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
At the heart of the dispute lies the interpretation of the 14th Amendment, which states that “All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States.” The Trump administration contends that the phrase “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” allows the U.S. to deny citizenship to children born to parents residing in the country without legal authorization, effectively dismantling a long-standing tenet of U.S. law.
Government lawyers argued that “prior misimpressions of the citizenship clause have created a perverse incentive for illegal immigration that has negatively impacted this country’s sovereignty, national security, and economic stability.” However, Judge Joseph LaPlante found these arguments unpersuasive, stating that his decision to issue the injunction was “not a close call.” He emphasized that depriving U.S. citizenship constitutes irreparable harm.
The ruling offers immediate protection to families across the country grappling with uncertainty and fear surrounding the executive order. “This is going to protect every single child around the country from this lawless, unconstitutional and cruel executive order,” stated an attorney for the plaintiffs.
The legal battle is far from over. The Supreme Court previously limited nationwide injunctions blocking the order in a June 27 ruling, giving lower courts 30 days to reassess the cases. Opponents of the policy have swiftly returned to court, seeking to reinstate protections. Similar cases are underway in Washington state, where the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has requested briefs clarifying the impact of the Supreme Court’s ruling, and in Maryland, where a judge is considering another class-action lawsuit.
Organizations like CASA, a nonprofit immigrant rights group, are working to reassure communities affected by the order. “No one has to move states right this instant,” said Ama Frimpong, CASA’s legal director. “There’s different avenues through which we are all fighting, again, to make sure that this executive order never actually sees the light of day.”
The plaintiffs in the New Hampshire case, identified only by pseudonyms, represent the human impact of the policy. One plaintiff, a woman from Honduras seeking asylum, is due to give birth in October and fears for her family’s safety. “I do not want my child to live in fear and hiding,” she wrote to the court. “I do not want my child to be a target for immigration enforcement. I fear our family could be at risk of separation.” Another plaintiff, a man from Brazil, expressed his hope for his child’s future: “My baby has the right to citizenship and a future in the United States.”
The judge’s decision includes a seven-day stay to allow for appeal, signaling the ongoing legal fight over birthright citizenship will continue to unfold in the coming weeks.
