A federal judge on Thursday again blocked the Trump administration from enforcing an executive order that would limit birthright citizenship, following a recent US Supreme Court decision that narrowed the use of nationwide injunctions.
US District Judge, Joseph Laplante, sitting in Concord, New Hampshire, issued the ruling after immigrant rights groups asked him to allow their lawsuit to represent all babies potentially affected by the policy.
The judge agreed to grant class action status, which gave him the authority to stop the order from taking effect nationwide.
Laplante said the decision to issue an injunction wasn’t difficult, explaining that the impact of stripping children of citizenship would be serious.
“That’s irreparable harm, citizenship alone. It is the greatest privilege that exists in the world,” he said.
He paused the ruling for seven days to give the Trump administration time to appeal and said he would issue a full written decision by the end of the day.
The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Tribune Online gathered that Trump’s order had been scheduled to take effect on July 27, following the Supreme Court’s June 27 ruling that limited the ability of judges to block federal policies with nationwide scope.
In response, the ACLU and other advocates filed suit on behalf of noncitizens in the U.S. who feared their newborns could be denied citizenship.
Plaintiffs’ lawyers pointed to an exception in the Supreme Court’s ruling, which allows nationwide relief in class action lawsuits. They argued that the exception applies here, since the order could affect thousands of families.
In previous rulings, three federal judges concluded that Trump’s directive likely violates the U.S. Constitution’s 14th Amendment, which states: 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 Justice Department maintained that Trump’s order follows the Constitution and urged Laplante not to allow the case to proceed as a class action.
US Supreme Court did not weigh in on the constitutionality of the policy itself. Trump issued the order in January as part of his immigration agenda. It directs federal agencies to deny citizenship to children born in the U.S. unless at least one parent is a US citizen or lawful permanent resident.
The Supreme Court recently told lower courts to reconsider three broad injunctions against Trump’s order, finding that judges lack the authority to block federal policies for people not directly involved in the lawsuits. Still, federal courts have continued to issue rulings that suspend parts of Trump’s policies found to be unlawful.
In the majority opinion, Justice Amy Coney Barrett clarified that plaintiffs may still pursue nationwide relief through other legal pathways, such as class actions.
Immigrant rights groups quickly filed two class actions after the ruling, including the one before Laplante. He had previously ruled in a related case in February that Trump’s order likely violates the Constitution.
In that ruling, Laplante, who was appointed by President George W. Bush, said the policy contradicts the 14th Amendment and a 1898 Supreme Court case, United States v. Wong Kim Ark, which upheld the principle of birthright citizenship regardless of a child’s parents’ immigration status.
Laplante acknowledged his previous reluctance to issue a broad injunction: “It’s a better process to narrow these decisions and not have judges create national policy,” he said. “That said, the Supreme Court suggested a class action is a better option.”
The Trump administration argued that the lead plaintiffs have different immigration statuses, making them unsuitable to represent a unified class. It also said a new injunction would “short circuit” the legal process usually required to seek such relief.
ALSO READ TOP STORIES FROM NIGERIAN TRIBUNE
and then