Federal appeals court issues another blow to Trump's effort to end birthright citizenship
The 2-1 ruling from the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals is significant because the Supreme Court late last month ordered lower courts to take a second look at a set of nationwide injunctions issued earlier this year that halted Trump's implementation of his Day One order to ensure they weren't broader than necessary.
The San Francisco-based appeals court decided that one such injunction issued by a federal judge in Seattle in a case brought by a group of Democratic-led states did not represent a judicial overreach that needed to be reined in.
'The district court below concluded that a universal preliminary injunction is necessary to provide the states with complete relief. We conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in issuing a universal injunction in order to give the states complete relief,' appeals court Judge Ronald Gould wrote for the majority.
'The states would suffer the same irreparable harms under a geographically-limited injunction as they would without an injunction,' Gould, an appointee of former President Bill Clinton, added, explaining that a narrower injunction would require the states that challenged the law to overhaul their eligibility verification systems for various social services programs.
Wednesday's decision also represents the first time an appeals court has fully concluded that Trump's order is unconstitutional. The Trump administration has the option of asking the full 9th Circuit to review the case, but it could also appeal the matter straight to the Supreme Court.
'The district court correctly concluded that the Executive Order's proposed interpretation, denying citizenship to many persons born in the United States, is unconstitutional. We fully agree,' Gould wrote in the ruling, which was joined by appeals court judge Michael Hawkins, also a Clinton appointee.
He went on to say that Trump's order contradicts the Citizenship Clause of the Constitution, an 1898 Supreme Court case known as United States v. Wong Kim Ark and decades of Executive Branch practice.
Trump's order is already blocked on a nationwide basis after a federal judge in New Hampshire barred enforcement of it against any babies who would be impacted by the policy in a class-action lawsuit brought by the American Civil Liberties Union. Such lawsuits are one of the ways the Supreme Court said plaintiffs can still try to broadly block Trump's order.
Appeals court Judge Patrick Bumatay, a Trump appointee, partially dissented from the court's ruling on Wednesday. He said he didn't think the states who challenged Trump's order had the legal right — known as 'standing' — to bring the lawsuit in the first place. As a result, he said, he thought it was 'premature to address the merits of the citizenship question or the scope of the injunction.'
US District Judge John Coughenour, a Ronald Reagan appointee in Seattle, was the first federal judge to block Trump's order. When he first issued an emergency order preventing enforcement of it in late January, he said it was 'blatantly unconstitutional.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
a few seconds ago
- Yahoo
'Total Mental Collapse': Trump Ripped After 'Insane' New Ramble In Europe
President Donald Trump spent part of his weekend in Scotland reviving his old grievances against wind power, even claiming at one point that it was 'killing' Americans. During a meeting with European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, Trump abruptly detoured from immigration to wind turbines. 'And the other thing I say to Europe: We will not allow a windmill to be built in the United States,' Trump said. 'They're killing us.' He added: 'They're killing the beauty of our scenery, our valleys, our beautiful plains ― and I'm not talking about airplanes. I'm talking about beautiful plains, beautiful areas in the United States, and you look up and you see windmills all over the place. It's a horrible thing. It's the most expensive form of energy. It's no good. They're made in China, almost all of them.' He complained that wind turbines 'rust and rot in eight years,' and then can't be 'buried' because they will harm the soil. 'The whole thing is a con job,' he said. 'It's very expensive. And in all fairness, Germany tried it and wind doesn't work.' Much of what the president said was wildly inaccurate: Germany gets more than a quarter of its energy from wind, turbines last about 30 years (not eight) according to the U.S Department of Energy, it's not the most expensive form of energy, and they're not 'almost all' made in China. Several users asked Grok, the AI tool within X, to fact-check Trump's claims on wind power. Here's a typical response: Trump, who has frequently attacked renewable energy, has a special hatred of wind power that likely began some two decades ago, when an offshore wind farm was proposed near the land that would become his golf resort in Scotland. He sued to block it, lost, and has complained about wind and other forms of renewable energy since. He mentioned that on Sunday as well. 'Today I'm playing the best course I think in the world, Turnberry ― even though I own it ― it's probably the best course in the world, right?' he said. 'And I look over the horizon and I see nine windmills... I said, 'Isn't that a shame? What a shame.'' Trump has previously taken his anti-wind stance to absurd extremes, such as in 2019, when he falsely claimed wind turbines cause cancer. 'The wind, the wind, it sounds so wonderful,' he said last year. 'The wind, the wind, the wind is, the wind is bullshit, I'll tell you.' Trump's critics called him out for his latest out-of-the-blue tirade against wind energy:
22 minutes ago
Hong Kong's CK Hutchison seeks Chinese investor to join Panama Ports deal
HONG KONG -- A Hong Kong conglomerate that's selling ports at the Panama Canal said Monday it may seek a Chinese investor to join a consortium of buyers, a move that could please Beijing but bring more U.S. scrutiny to the geopolitically fraught deal. CK Hutchison Holdings' initial plan to sell port assets in dozens of countries to a group that includes U.S. investment firm BlackRock Inc. pleased President Donald Trump, who has alleged that China interferes with the critical shipping lane's operations in Panama. However, they apparently angered Beijing and drew a review from Chinese anti-monopoly authorities. A Beijing-backed newspaper posted scathing commentaries about the deal, with one describing it as a betrayal of all Chinese. Beijing's offices overseeing Hong Kong affairs have reposted some of these commentaries, widely seen as an indication of Chinese leaders' stance. A Hutchison subsidiary has operated ports at both ends of the Panama Canal since 1997. After months of uncertainty brought by tensions between Washington and Beijing, Hutchison said in a statement that the exclusive negotiations period with the consortium has expired. However, it added 'the Group remains in discussions with members of the consortium with a view to inviting major strategic investor from the PRC to join as a significant member of the consortium,' referring to the People's Republic of China. It said they needed to change the membership of the consortium and the structure of the transaction for the deal to be able to pass reviews by 'all relevant authorities." The awkward position Hutchison found itself in for months highlights the challenges Hong Kong business elites face in navigating Beijing's expectations of national loyalty, especially when relations between China and the United States are strained. Hong Kong has overhauled its electoral system to ensure the city is run by 'patriots.' CK Hutchison is owned by the family of Hong Kong's richest man, Li Ka-shing. It announced March 4 that it would sell all its shares in Hutchison Port Holdings and in Hutchison Port Group Holdings to the consortium that also includes BlackRock subsidiary Global Infrastructure Partners and Terminal Investment Limited, a subsidiary of the Mediterranean Shipping Company. In May, Hutchinson co-managing director, Dominic Lai told shareholders that Terminal Investment was the main investor. Its parent company is led by Italian shipping scion Diego Aponte, whose family reportedly has a longstanding relationship with Li's. The initial deal, valued at nearly $23 billion including $5 billion in debt, would have given the consortium control over 43 ports in 23 countries, including the ports of Balboa and Cristobal, located at either end of the canal. That agreement also required approval from Panama's government.
Bloomberg
30 minutes ago
- Bloomberg
Europeans, Not Trump, Ended Up Chickening Out
Donald Trump's world tour of arm-twisting on trade has landed its latest deal: A 15% baseline tariff on European Union goods, lowered from the recently threatened 30%, in return for an apparent smorgasbord of continental investments into the US and huge purchases of energy and military equipment. Japan sealed a similar deal last week while pushing back on some extravagant Trumpian claims. 'It was the best we could get,' European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said. Many will agree with her. The US is the EU's biggest trade partner and a dominant defense and technology supplier – a spiral of tit-for-tat tariffs is something Europeans simply can't afford, as LVMH Moet Hennessy Louis Vuitton SE boss Bernard Arnault said last week. Sealing the deal before the Aug. 1 deadline at a level big companies say they find 'manageable' is market positive, lifting the tariff fog and avoiding a worst-case scenario drag on euro zone gross domestic product of 1.2%, according to Barclays Plc. From German autos to French aerospace, transatlantic trade is looking a little less stuck.
