WASHINGTON D.C., — A federal judge in New Hampshire on Wednesday halted the implementation of an executive order signed by President Donald J. Trump that sought to end birthright citizenship for children born in the United States to undocumented immigrants and non-permanent residents.
The ruling, issued by U.S. District Judge Joseph Laplante, grants class-action status to a group of plaintiffs challenging the policy and imposes a nationwide block, citing the potential for “irreparable harm” if the order were allowed to take effect later this month. The order, Executive Order 14160, signed by President Trump on January 20, had been scheduled to go into effect on July 27.
The decision comes just weeks after the U.S. Supreme Court limited the ability of federal courts to issue sweeping national injunctions. However, the justices carved out an exception for class-action cases—a path the plaintiffs in this case pursued with a revised approach. Judge Laplante’s order is now one of the first major tests of the Supreme Court’s recent ruling.
President Trump’s order would have denied citizenship to children born on U.S. soil unless at least one parent was a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident. Immigrant rights advocates immediately challenged the policy, arguing it defied more than a century of constitutional law and precedent.
“This executive order is a direct attack on the 14th Amendment and the very concept of equal birthright citizenship,” said Andrea Santiago, an attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union, which is representing several of the plaintiffs. “This ruling ensures that no child will be punished for who their parents are or how they arrived here.”
The Trump administration defended the policy as a lawful clarification of the 14th Amendment’s citizenship clause, which states that “all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States.” Administration lawyers have argued that this clause excludes children of individuals who are not lawfully present in the country.
The phrase “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” has become a central battleground in the legal fight. Conservative legal scholars, including John C. Eastman of the Claremont Institute and Peter H. Schuck of Yale, argue that the term was never intended to cover children born to undocumented immigrants or foreign nationals who are only temporarily present in the United States. They assert that such individuals are not fully subject to U.S. law in the same way that citizens and legal residents are, and therefore their U.S.-born children do not automatically acquire citizenship.
The Trump administration has continued to press for a narrower interpretation, arguing that the Constitution does not require granting citizenship to the children of individuals in the country unlawfully.
Judge Laplante’s ruling requires that the current system of birthright citizenship remains in place while litigation proceeds. Laplante issued a stay of his ruling, pending time for the Trump Administration to appeal.
Legal experts expect the issue to eventually return to the Supreme Court, which has not ruled directly on the scope of the 14th Amendment’s Citizenship Clause in modern times.
While the White House did not immediately comment on the ruling, a spokesperson for the Department of Justice said the administration was “reviewing the decision and considering next steps.”
Leave a Reply