{"id":44623,"date":"2025-07-10T20:05:00","date_gmt":"2025-07-11T01:05:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/ustower.net\/?p=44623"},"modified":"2025-07-10T21:08:33","modified_gmt":"2025-07-11T02:08:33","slug":"federal-judge-issues-new-nationwide-block-against-trumps-order-seeking-to-end-birthright-citizenship","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/ustower.net\/?p=44623","title":{"rendered":"Federal judge issues new nationwide block against Trump\u2019s order seeking to end birthright citizenship"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

A federal judge agreed Thursday to issue a new nationwide block<\/u><\/a> against President Donald Trump\u2019s executive order seeking to end birthright citizenship.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The ruling from US District Judge Joseph Laplante is significant because the Supreme Court last month curbed the power of lower court judges to issue nationwide injunctions<\/u><\/a>, while keeping intact the ability of plaintiffs to seek a widespread block of the order through class action lawsuits, which is what happened Thursday in New Hampshire.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Ruling from the bench, Laplante granted a request from immigration rights attorneys to certify a nationwide class that \u201cwill be comprised only of those deprived of citizenship\u201d and issued a preliminary injunction indefinitely blocking Trump\u2019s Day One order from being enforced against any baby born after February 20.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cThe preliminary injunction is just not a close call to the court,\u201d Laplante said during a hearing. \u201cThe deprivation of US citizenship and an abrupt change of policy that was longstanding \u2026 that\u2019s irreparable harm.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

US citizenship, the judge added, \u201cis the greatest privilege that exists in the world.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The judge, an appointee of former President George W. Bush, said he would pause his order for several days to give the Trump administration time to appeal his decision.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Laplante issued a written 38-page order<\/u><\/a> later Thursday as well.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Laplante wrote that he \u201chas no difficulty concluding that the rapid adoption by executive order, without legislation and the attending national debate, of a new government policy of highly questionable constitutionality that would deny citizenship to many thousands of individuals previously granted citizenship under an indisputably longstanding policy, constitutes irreparable harm, and that all class representatives could suffer irreparable harm absent an injunction.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Laplante\u2019s ruling could prove to be a critical bulwark against Trump\u2019s policy as other courts scramble to take a second look at their decisions in light of the Supreme Court\u2019s ruling.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The White House called the ruling \u201can obvious and unlawful attempt to circumvent the Supreme Court\u2019s clear order against universal relief.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cThis judge\u2019s decision disregards the rule of law by abusing class action certification procedures. The Trump Administration will be fighting vigorously against the attempts of these rogue district court judges to impede the policies President Trump was elected to implement,\u201d White House spokesman Harrison Fields said in a statement.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In February, Laplante indefinitely blocked the Trump administration from enforcing the order only against members of several nonprofit groups who would have been impacted by it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cI\u2019m the judge who wasn\u2019t comfortable with issuing a nationwide injunction. Class action is different,\u201d the judge said at one point during Thursday\u2019s hearing. \u201cThe Supreme Court suggested class action is a better option.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In his ruling earlier this year, Laplante said Trump\u2019s order \u201ccontradicts the text of the Fourteenth Amendment and the century-old untouched precedent that interprets it.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Several other judges similarly ruled that Trump\u2019s order was unconstitutional, but their injunctions applied nationwide and prompted the administration to mount the series of appeals that eventually landed before the Supreme Court.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Class includes children impacted by Trump\u2019s order<\/strong><\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Thursday\u2019s proceeding focused largely on the request from immigration rights attorneys who brought the legal challenge for Laplante to certify a class of individuals that would include \u201call current and future children\u201d who would be affected by Trump\u2019s order and their parents. The judge\u2019s ruling Thursday did not include the parents in the class.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The judge appeared sympathetic to arguments pushed by the Justice Department that certifying a class including the parents might run up against the federal rules regarding class certification if those adults each had immigration situations that were significantly different from another adult in the class.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

DOJ attorney Eric Hamilton had wanted Laplante to allow for discovery so more information could be gathered on the adults who are part of the legal challenge, but the judge, aware of the urgency of the litigation, noted that such court-ordered fact-finding wouldn\u2019t be feasible.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cYou\u2019re right, (ordinarily) we\u2019d conduct discovery before granting class certification,\u201d Laplante said. \u201cThere\u2019s no time for discovery.\u201d His decision to keep the certified class somewhat narrow allows the case to proceed without that time-consuming process.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cI think that the class representatives present issues \u2026 that the newborn infants do not,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Class action lawsuits require \u201cclass representatives,\u201d or individuals who, if the class is certified, will represent the class members.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In this case, brought by the American Civil Liberties Union, those proposed representatives had included a Honduran asylum-seeker \u2013 referred to in court papers as \u201cBarbara\u201d and who is living in New Hampshire and expecting a baby in October \u2013 and a Brazilian man \u2013 referred to as \u201cMark\u201d \u2013 who is attempting to get lawful permanent status. Mark\u2019s wife, who is not in the US lawfully, gave birth in March.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cIf the Order is left in place,\u201d the ACLU lawyers wrote, \u201cthose children will face numerous obstacles to life in the United States, including stigma and potential statelessness; loss of their right to vote, serve on federal juries and in many elected offices, and work in various federal jobs; ineligibility for various federal programs; and potential arrest, detention, and deportation to countries they may have never even seen.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Signed by Trump on January 20, the executive order, titled \u201cPROTECTING THE MEANING AND VALUE OF AMERICAN CITIZENSHIP,\u201d said that the federal government will not \u201cissue documents recognizing United States citizenship\u201d to any children born on American soil to parents who were in the country unlawfully or were in the states lawfully but temporarily.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Supreme Court said in its June 27 ruling that the administration cannot begin enforcing the order for 30 days, though the government is allowed to begin developing guidance on how the policy will be implemented.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In the other challenges to Trump\u2019s order, lower courts around the country have asked the parties to submit written legal arguments addressing how the Supreme Court\u2019s ruling could impact the nationwide injunctions issued in those cases, and more court proceedings are expected in the coming days and weeks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But that process will take time and it\u2019s unclear whether any of those courts will narrow their injunctions ahead of when Trump is permitted to enforce the birthright policy.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cI feel like we\u2019re the only people who rushed around here,\u201d Laplante quipped during Thursday\u2019s hearing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

ACLU attorney Cody Wofsy in a statement said the judge\u2019s decision is \u201ca huge victory and will help protect the citizenship of all children born in the United States, as the Constitution intended.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

What the Supreme Court said<\/strong><\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Laplante\u2019s decision aligns with the Supreme Court\u2019s blockbuster ruling last month<\/u><\/a>, which left class-action litigation on the table as a way to block Trump\u2019s birthright citizenship order \u2013 and potentially other policies.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Supreme Court\u2019s decision was focused on one type of court order \u2013 a nationwide injunction \u2013 but several of the justices were keen to note that plaintiffs suing an administration would have other avenues to shut down policies that might run afoul of the Constitution or federal law. Writing for the majority, Justice Amy Coney Barrett\u2002<\/u><\/a>suggested the kind of class-action litigation immigrant rights groups are now pursuing have many advantages.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Justice Brett Kavanaugh, a conservative who is often closer to the center of the court in high-profile cases, seemed especially open to having the Supreme Court review, on an emergency basis, exactly the kind of order Laplante issued.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cToday\u2019s decision on district court injunctions will not affect this court\u2019s vitally important responsibility to resolve applications for stays or injunctions with respect to major new federal statutes and executive actions,\u201d Kavanaugh wrote<\/u><\/a>. \u201cDeciding those applications is not a distraction from our job. It is a critical part of our job.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Perhaps, Kavanaugh mused, a district court might issue \u201cthe functional equivalent of a universal injunction\u201d by \u201cgranting or denying a preliminary injunction\u201d in a class-action suit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cNo matter how the preliminary-injunction litigation on those kinds of significant matters transpires in the district courts, the courts of appeals in turn will undoubtedly be called upon to promptly grant or deny temporary stays or temporary injunctions in many cases,\u201d Kavanaugh wrote.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But Laplante\u2019s ruling is nevertheless almost certain to force the justices to deal with a split that emerged over the particulars of those cases. And the court\u2019s majority opinion left that split unsettled.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Several conservatives, including Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas, warned against courts using class-action litigation to essentially supplant the kind of nationwide injunction the court had just shot down.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cLax enforcement of the requirements\u201d for certifying a class, Alito wrote in an opinion joined by Thomas, \u201cwould create a potentially significant loophole to today\u2019s decision.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Federal courts, he added, \u201cshould thus be vigilant against such potential abuses of these tools.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Whether Laplante\u2019s decision is an \u201cabuse\u201d or exactly what the Supreme Court had in mind will likely wind up back before the justices in short order.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

cnn<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

A federal judge agreed Thursday to issue a new nationwide block against President Donald Trump\u2019s executive order seeking to end birthright citizenship. The ruling from US District Judge Joseph Laplante is significant because the Supreme Court last month curbed the power of lower court judges to issue nationwide injunctions, while keeping intact the ability of plaintiffs to seek […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":6,"featured_media":44624,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[5],"tags":[32101,4208,33927,1230],"class_list":["post-44623","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-politics","tag-birthright-citizenship","tag-federal-judge","tag-nationwide-block","tag-trump"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/ustower.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/44623","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/ustower.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/ustower.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ustower.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/6"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ustower.net\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=44623"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/ustower.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/44623\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":44625,"href":"https:\/\/ustower.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/44623\/revisions\/44625"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ustower.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/44624"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/ustower.net\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=44623"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ustower.net\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=44623"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ustower.net\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=44623"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}