New Hampshire judge blocks Trump’s birthright citizenship order weeks after SCOTUS restricted universal injunctions

A New Hampshire federal judge issued a temporary nationwide block on President Trump’s executive order to end birthright citizenship, two weeks after the Supreme Court quashed a universal injunction in the case.

Concord US District Judge Joseph Laplante also certified a nationwide class for “those deprived of citizenship,” using an authority that the Supreme Court left untouched after its landmark decision June 27. 

“The preliminary injunction is just not a close call to the court,” Laplante, a US citizenship and an abrupt change of policy that was longstanding … that’s irreparable harm.”

3

Laplante stayed his order for seven days to give the Trump administration time to appeal it. Trump’s team has made clear that it wants to get the Supreme Court to evaluate the merits of his birthright citizenship order during its next term, which begins Oct. 6.

On Jan. 20, during Trump’s first day back in the White House, he signed an executive order declaring that only children who have at least one parent who is a US citizen or legal permanent resident would be automatically granted citizenship.

3

The 14th Amendment stipulates that “[a]ll 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.”

Trump argued that birthright citizenship has been abused and ushered in an era of “birth tourism,” in which foreign nationals have babies in the US to give their children citizenship.

Federal judges in Maryland, Massachusetts and Washington had issued sweeping universal injunctions, also known as nationwide injunctions, to block that order from taking effect. 

But the Supreme Court ruled last month that the lower courts lack the authority to issue universal injunctions, a practice that has become more frequent over recent decades. 

The high court left open the possibility of other national blocks against presidential actions, including when class action lawsuits are filed, which allow plaintiffs to sue on behalf of a larger cohort of people. The Supreme Court did not weigh in on the merits of Trump’s order.

In a concurring opinion, conservative Justice Samuel Alito warned the lower courts against loosening their standards when it comes to certifying classes in class action lawsuits.

“These requirements are more than ‘a mere pleading standard,’ … and a hasty application of Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure can have drastic consequences, creating ‘potential unfairness’ for absent class members and confusion (and pressure to settle) for defendants,” Alito wrote.

3

The would-be class action was brought on behalf of a pregnant immigrant, two parents and infants and is backed by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU).

“This is going to protect every single child around the country from this lawless, unconstitutional and cruel executive order,” ACLU attorney Cody Wofsy said after a hearing in the case.

“The Supreme Court’s decision did not remotely suggest otherwise, and we are fighting to make sure President Trump cannot trample on the citizenship rights of a single child.”

Trump administration lawyers argued that a class action suit over the birthright citizenship order was too broad.