Judge again blocks ban on birthright citizenship, extends order nationwide

Yahoo

2 days ago

The Rev. Patrick Mahoney, director of the Christian Defense Coalition, joined demonstrators outside the U.S. Supreme Court on May 15 to protest the Trump administration's effort to end birthright citizenship for children of undocumented immigrants, as justices heard a challenge to the order. (Photo by Ashley Murray/States Newsroom)
A federal judge in Maryland ordered a nationwide halt — again — to a Trump administration order that would have denied citizenship to any baby born in the U.S. after February unless at least one of the parents is a citizen.
The ruling late Thursday by U.S. District Judge Deborah Boardman is the fourth to block President Donald Trump's executive order since June, when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that judges around the country had exceeded their authority by issuing nationwide stays.
But the justices said lower courts could issue nationwide injunctions if the lawsuits were class-action suits on behalf of all newborns in the U.S. who might be affected by the executive order. Which is what Boardman did Thursday
Boardman rejected a request to include parents in the class-action suit. But she identified a nationwide class of children born on U.S. soil who 'unquestionably would be citizens but for the Executive Order,' an order the judge said is 'almost certainly unconstitutional.'
She wrote that the plaintiffs — eight undocumented mothers who are pregnant or have children who were born in the U.S. — 'are likely to succeed on the merits of their constitutional claim because the Executive Order contradicts the plain language of the Fourteenth amendment,' which says that 'all persons' born the U.S. are citizens of the country and of the state in which they were born.
While the immigrants would be harmed in the absence of an injunction, Boardman wrote, there would be little harm to the government to temporarily extending the practice of birthright citizenship that has been recognized in the U.S. for well over a century.
Boardman rejected the government's argument that she should restrict her injunction just to Maryland.
'That relief must include every child in the United States who is subject to the Executive Order. After all, the Executive Order does not target only children born in Maryland; it seeks to deny citizenship to 'persons born in the United States,'' she wrote.
A government attorney declined to comment Friday on the order, and emails seeking comment from the White House were not immediately returned. But immigrant advocates welcomed Boardman's order.
'This is a national issue that affects every single one of us in this country,' said Ama Frimpong, legal director at CASA, which filed suit with the immigrant women.
The Maryland suit was one of several around the country that were filed soon after Trump's order on 'Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship,' which he issued on Jan. 20, his first day back in office. It claimed that birthright citizenship was never meant to be a universal right, and it said that anyone born after Feb.19 — a month after the order was signed — would be denied citizenship unless one parent was a citizen or permanent legal resident.
The order was swiftly challenges and three judges, including Boardman, issued nationwide injunctions to halt the order. When those were upheld on appeal, the government took the case to the Supreme Court, which said a national injunction could only be issued in class-action suit with a legitimate nationwide class of plaintiffs.
Within hours of that ruling, attorneys for CASA were back in court, filing paperwork to turn their case into a class-action suit, adding women from North and South Carolina, among other states as plaintiffs.
Boardman's approval of a class-action suit, and a national preliminary injunction, comes almost a month after a U.S. District judge in New Hampshire did the same thing.
Frimpong called Trump's order 'just a part of the usual fear tactics to make people afraid of what they believe the federal government will do — even though it will never happen because it is blatantly unlawful and unconstitutional.'
She said she anticipates that the Trump administration will again appeal the decision, but predicts that the case will go through the ordinary course of litigation.
'What we are looking forward to is, once and for all. putting the issue to bed and our courts making absolutely clear that the 14th Amendment is not up for debate, and it's not up for subjective interpretation,' Frimpong said. 'It is the law and it is going to remain the law.'
This report was first published by Maryland Matters , which like NC Newsline, is part of the national States Newsroom network. Contact Editor Steve Crane for questions: [e-mail].