Judge Overturns Trump’s Birthright Citizenship Order in Wake of Supreme Court Decision

A U.S. judge has temporarily blocked President Donald Trump’s executive order that aimed to end birthright citizenship for certain residents. This ruling comes amid a legal challenge led by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), which filed a class action lawsuit on behalf of immigrant parents and their infants.

The judge in New Hampshire decided that the case could move forward, stopping Trump’s order from going into effect. This decision follows recent Supreme Court changes about how federal courts handle cases like these, allowing some rulings while tightening others.

The White House quickly fired back. Trump’s spokesperson, Harrison Fields, criticized the ruling, arguing it undermines the Supreme Court’s authority. He labeled the judge’s decision as a misuse of legal procedures aimed at disrupting Trump’s policies.

At the heart of the suit is the 14th Amendment, which guarantees citizenship to anyone born in the U.S. Trump’s proposal sought to strip this right from children of undocumented immigrants and foreign visitors, which critics argue is unconstitutional and harmful.

Legal experts have weighed in, noting that removing birthright citizenship could have wide-reaching effects. According to the latest Pew Research data, about 250,000 babies born in the U.S. annually could be impacted by such a change.

Historically, challenges to birthright citizenship have been around for decades, but they gained more traction during Trump’s presidency. Earlier attempts to adjust this right have failed in court, and multiple judges across the country have issued injunctions against similar orders.

The judge has given the Trump administration one week to respond. This issue has been a significant priority for Trump since he took office, and it reflects a broader conversation about immigration policies in America. With a conservative majority in the Supreme Court, the outcome could reshape American citizenship laws.

For a deeper look at the implications of this ruling, you can consult resources from the ACLU here.

Source link