New Jersey AG ‘confident' in battle against Trump birthright citizenship order
New Jersey Attorney General Matt Platkin, one of the plaintiffs in a 22-state lawsuit against President Trump's executive order curbing birthright citizenship, said Saturday he was 'confident' the order could still be blocked nationwide following a Friday Supreme Court ruling that broadly restricted the ability of the court system to halt the president's policies.
'There's a whole range of administrative challenges that would make this completely unworkable, which is why I'm confident we'll get the nationwide relief we've sought when we go back to the lower courts,' Platkin said in an MSNBC appearance.
The nation's highest court ruled Friday that Trump's executive order could be partially enforced because lower-court judges had exceeded their authority in issuing nationwide injunctions that blocked the policy. The ruling did not address the underlying constitutionality of Trump's order, but still drastically limited a judicial tool that has been used for decades, including to block federal policies from multiple presidential administrations.
New Jersey is one of 22 Democratic-led states, along with a group of expectant mothers and immigration organizations, that sued to block the executive order almost immediately after it was issued in January. The injunctions issued by three federal judges in Washington, Maryland and Massachusetts in the ensuing months granted relief not just to those plaintiffs, but everyone in the country.
That move, the Supreme Court majority said Friday, was unconstitutional. Instead, injunctions should be narrowly tailored to provide 'complete relief to each plaintiff with standing to sue.' The lower courts will now get the first attempt at tailoring injunctions to comply with the ruling.
On MSNBC, Platkin contended that 'complete relief' to the states harmed by the executive order would still involve blocking the executive order across the country.
'It would be impossible to administer a system of citizenship based on which state you live in,' he said.
The suits of the non-state plaintiffs, meanwhile, were quickly refashioned into class-action lawsuits, a legal route that Justice Amy Coney Barrett noted could provide broader relief against the birthright citizenship order in her majority opinion.
The executive order remains blocked for at least 30 days while the courts and parties sort out the next steps.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Times
13 minutes ago
- New York Times
We Shouldn't Have Billionaires, Mamdani Says
Zohran Mamdani, who campaigned for mayor on the theme of making New York City more affordable, said in a major national television interview that during a time of rising inequality, 'I don't think we should have billionaires.' Mr. Mamdani, the likely winner of the Democratic primary for mayor of New York, said in an appearance on 'Meet the Press' on Sunday that more equality is needed across the city, state and country, and that he looked forward to working 'with everyone, including billionaires, to make a city that is fairer for all of them.' At the same time, Mr. Mamdani, a democratic socialist, asserted that he is not a communist, a response to an attack from President Trump. 'I have already had to start to get used to the fact that the president will talk about how I look, how I sound, where I'm from, who I am — ultimately because he wants to distract from what I'm fighting for,' Mr. Mamdani said. But one question he continued to sidestep was whether he would denounce the phrase 'globalize the intifada,' after he declined to condemn it during a podcast interview before the primary. The slogan is a rallying cry for liberation among Palestinians and their supporters, but many Jews consider it a call to violence invoking resistance movements of the 1980s and 2000s. Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
Indianapolis Star
16 minutes ago
- Indianapolis Star
What is a vote-a-rama? Senate vote marathon ahead of Trump legislative package
An exhaustive series of Senate votes are about to begin around President Donald Trump's major tax, spending and policy legislative package − a marathon known in Washington parlance as a "vote-a-rama." It'll be time-consuming political theater centering around scores of amendments aimed at tweaking key parts of a measure that Trump has said is his signature piece of second-term legislation that he wants to sign into law by a self-imposed July 4 deadline. Few if any of the amendments are expected to win enough support to add or remove provisions from the bill. But it is still a rare occasion when senators can get votes on nearly any subject before the final vote to approve the entire legislative package. Here's what you need to know about a vote-a-rama. A vote-a-rama is a legislative event that was born out of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, according to the Senate's website. Following a debate on a budget resolution or reconciliation bill, senators can introduce an unlimited number of amendments with each receiving a vote. Republicans on June 28 offered up different interpretations on the importance of the amendment process, with Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, signaling she too had things she'd seek to revise that will go a long way toward helping her support the package. "There's some very good changes that have been made in the latest version, but I want to see further changes,' Collins said. Collins' GOP colleague, Sen. Brian Moreno of Ohio, painted a different and more partisan picture on the amendment slog ahead. 'I want everybody watching this to remember this as you listen to probably what's going to be 30-plus hours of complete nonsense from the other side," the freshman Republican said on the floor. The Senate previously defined a vote-a-rama as a piece of legislation voted on 15 times or more in a day. Daniel S. Holt, Associate Historian for the U.S. Senate Historical Office, told USA TODAY in an email that the change was made to align the chamber's definition with its connections to budget bills. "While the term is completely colloquial and has no firm definition in any official manner, we thought this was more in-line with the historical use of the term," Holt said. The Senate credits the first vote-a-rama to votes on a budget resolution taken on May 12, 1980. The chamber's website states that staff had been using the term as early as 1992. When Republican Whip Trent Lott of Mississippi was quoted by United Press International in 1996 using the phrase to refer to the event, it stuck. The Senate counts 45 vote-a-ramas. The vote-a-rama held on March 13, 2008, holds the current record for most amendments voted on: 44. Votes in a vote-a-rama work differently than during regular Senate order. Senate rules preclude debate on an amendment during the marathon of votes, though they can be waived to allow an opponent and a supporter of an amendment to speak for 30 seconds – according to former Senate aide Keith Hennessey. Votes are taken consecutively, and senators agree to shorten the window for votes from 15 minutes to 10 minutes, according to Hennessey. Senate rules prohibit food on the floor. But the good news is they do not have to remain on the floor for the entirety of the proceedings. One quirk in precedent allows for members to drink milk while in the chamber. On January 24, 1966, then Sen. Everett Dirksen, R-Illinois, asked the presiding officer if a page could go to a restaurant and return with a glass of milk while debating a bill to repeal a portion of the Taft-Hartly Act. The Congressional record from the day shows the presiding officer saying that there was nothing in the rules prohibiting it.
UPI
19 minutes ago
- UPI
Trump reveals group of 'wealthy people' wants to buy TikTok in U.S.
1 of 2 | A group of "very wealthy people" wants to buy the Chinese-owned TikTok social media app that is facing a ban in the United States, President Donald Trump said. File photo by John Angelillo/UPI | License Photo June 29 (UPI) -- President Donald Trump said a group of "very wealthy people" wants to buy the Chinese-owned TikTok social media app that is facing a ban in the United States. During an interview Friday with Maria Bartiromo that appeared Sunday on Fox News, Trump said, "We have a buyer for TikTok, by the way," declining to name the potential buyers. "I'll tell you in about two weeks," he added. The president said he believes Chinese President Xi Jinping "will probably" approve the deal for U.S. ownership of the video service, which was founded in September 2016. President Joe Biden signed a law in 2024 requiring TikTok to be blocked in the United States unless its parent company, ByteDance, sold it to a non-Chinese company over concerns that sensitive user data could be acquired by the Chinese government. The U.S. Supreme Court voted unanimously on Jan. 17 that TikTok must be banned from U.S. app stores unless the company divested from the platform and sold to an American company by Jan. 19. Biden said he didn't want to intervene in the final days of his presidency, the app went dark around 10:30 p.m. ET on Jan. 18 and the app ceased to appear on Apple and Google's app stores. The 170 million U.S. users and around 1 million creators lost access to the app for at least one day of the 23 million new videos uploaded daily. Those using the app spend about an hour a day looking at some of the 23 million new clips uploaded daily, with teens using it for 2-3 hours a day, according to Exploding Topics. But the next day, the company restored service after Donald Trump said he would pause the deadline for 75 days when he was sworn in as president on Jan. 20, and signed an executive order to do so on his first day in office. He has since pushed off the deadline two more times, with it now delayed until Sept. 17. In April, the White House said it was close to a deal in which 50% of the app would be owned by an American company. Negotiations ended when Trump announced tariffs on goods coming from China to the United States. Trump proposed 134% tariffs on most goods but it has been scaled back to 30% for some items exempt. During his first presidency, on Aug. 6, 2020, Trump signed an executive order "action must be taken to address the threat posed by one mobile application in particular, TikTok" from China. Trump later credited TikTok with gaining more young voters in the 2024 election and seemed to soften on his stance. ByteDance has also been reluctant to turn over rights to the app's algorithm. It is the fifth-most social network with 1.6 billion users in the world behind Facebook, YouTube, Instagram and WhatsApp, according to Statistica. In April, Adweek compiled a list of suitors for U.S. rights, including Applovin, Amazon, Oracle, Blackstone and Andreessen Horowitz. None confirmed negotiations to Addwek. "It does not feel like these are serious bids for TikTok," David Arslanian, managing director of Progress Partners, told Adweek. "It is hard to imagine any of these companies, like Amazon and Oracle, successfully operating just a piece of TikTok."
