Federal court halts Trump’s effort to restrict birthright citizenship

A federal judge has temporarily blocked an executive order from President Donald Trump that seeks to end birthright citizenship, delivering another legal obstacle to the controversial measure. U.S. District Judge Joseph LaPlante issued the injunction on Thursday, July 10, in New Hampshire, citing potential “irreparable harm” if the order were allowed to take effect. The court approved the relief but put it on hold for seven days, giving the federal government time to appeal.

New Hampshire judge issues injunction 

The legal challenge emerged on June 27, hours after the U.S. Supreme Court issued a decision that left room for parts of the executive order to move forward. Plaintiffs responded by filing a nationwide class action lawsuit.

“This morning, the federal court in New Hampshire agreed once again that President Trump’s executive order to restrict birthright citizenship is a blatant violation of the U.S. Constitution. The executive order, which is now temporarily blocked nationwide in this class action lawsuit and blocked regionally in our January lawsuit, stands in flagrant opposition to our constitutional rights, values, and history,” said Devon Chaffee, executive director of the ACLU of New Hampshire.

Case centers around US Constitution

At the center of the dispute is the 14th Amendment, which guarantees citizenship to anyone born or naturalized in the United States.

The executive order, signed by Trump on Jan. 20, aimed to redefine that constitutional right. Trump argued that the amendment was never meant to apply to everyone born on U.S. soil, and his directive framed citizenship as a privilege rather than a guaranteed right.

“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 order stated, echoing the text of the amendment while challenging its interpretation.

Just at the end of June, the U.S. Supreme Court reviewed Trump’s case. In a 6-3 vote, the justices ruled that federal judges likely overstepped their authority by issuing what are known as universal injunctions. These nationwide orders prevent government policies from being enforced against anyone, not just the plaintiffs who brought the case. 

Three separate lawsuits, filed by individuals, advocacy groups and state governments, challenged the order, citing violations of both the 14th Amendment and the Nationality Act of 1940. District courts in Massachusetts, Maryland and Washington state agreed, issuing broad injunctions that blocked the policy nationwide. The federal government appealed, arguing the courts had no authority to issue sweeping injunctions.

Writing for the majority, Justice Amy Coney Barrett said that while courts can protect the rights of plaintiffs, they cannot bar enforcement of a law or policy against people not involved in a case. SCOTUS stopped short of ruling on the constitutionality of the executive order itself. Instead, it sent the case back to lower courts to determine whether narrower, plaintiff-specific injunctions are more appropriate.

In dissent, Justice Sonia Sotomayor, joined by Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson, argued the majority’s decision weakens the judiciary’s ability to check executive overreach.

What does Trump’s executive order do? 

The executive order explains that some children born in the United States may no longer be granted automatic U.S. citizenship.

The policy targets cases where a child is born on U.S. soil but:

• The mother was in the country illegally, and the father was not a U.S. citizen or a lawful permanent resident
• The mother was in the U.S. legally, but only briefly, such as on a tourist, student or work visa, and the father was not a U.S. citizen or permanent resident.

In both situations, the child would not be recognized as a U.S. citizen under the order. Federal agencies are also instructed not to grant or accept any documents that identify such individuals as citizens. State and local documents granting citizenship in those cases would also be invalid at the federal level.

The policy would have taken effect 30 days after the order was signed and applied only to children born after that date.

The order does not change the status of children born to legal permanent residents or others who already qualify for citizenship under current law. It also defines “mother” and “father” as biological parents.