
US judge reaffirms nationwide injunction blocking Trump executive order on birthright citizenship
In a written ruling, US District Judge Leo Sorokin in Boston said his earlier nationwide injunction was the only way to provide complete relief to a coalition of Democratic-led states that brought the lawsuit before him, rejecting the Trump administration's argument that a narrower ruling was warranted because of a June decision from the US Supreme Court.
Sorokin wrote that the evidence before him 'does not support a finding that any narrower option would feasibly and adequately protect the plaintiffs from the injuries they have shown they are likely to suffer if the unlawful policy announced in the Executive Order takes effect during the pendency of this lawsuit.'
The White House and Department of Justice did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
New Jersey Attorney General Matthew J. Platkin, a Democrat, said in a statement that the states were thrilled with the decision.
'American-born babies are American, just as they have been at every other time in our nation's history. The president cannot change that legal rule with the stroke of a pen.'
The Supreme Court's June 27 ruling in litigation over Trump's birthright citizenship order limited the ability of judges to issue so-called 'universal' injunctions — in which a single district court judge can block enforcement of a federal policy across the country — and directed lower courts that had blocked the Republican president's policy nationally to reconsider the scope of their orders.
But the ruling contained exceptions allowing courts to potentially still block it across the country again.
That has already allowed a judge in New Hampshire to once again halt Trump's order from taking effect by issuing an injunction in a nationwide class action of children who would be denied citizenship under the policy.
A federal appeals court in California on Wednesday said Trump's executive order violated the citizenship clause of the US Constitution's 14th Amendment by denying citizenship to many persons born in the US, and blocked its enforcement nationwide.
Trump signed the executive order on January 20, his first day back in office, as part of his crackdown on immigration.
The executive order directed federal agencies to refuse to recognize the citizenship of US-born children who do not have at least one parent who is an American citizen or lawful permanent resident, also known as a 'green card' holder.
It was swiftly challenged in court by Democratic attorneys general from 22 states and immigrant rights advocates who argued it was unconstitutional.
Last week, the states had argued at a hearing before Sorokin that a nationwide injunction was essential. They said restricting birthright citizenship in some states but not others would make it difficult to administer federal benefits programs like Medicaid. A patchwork approach would also lead to confusion among immigrant parents and a surge of people moving to states where Trump's executive order is on hold, straining resources, they argued.
The Justice Department had countered that the states, by continuing to advocate for universal relief, had failed to come to grips with the Supreme Court's decision.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Time of India
33 minutes ago
- Time of India
Ministers likely to meet governor today
Thiruvananthapuram : Amidst the widening rift between Governor Rajendra Arlekar and state govt, higher education minister R Bindu and law minister P Rajeeve are scheduled to call on the governor at Raj Bhavan on Sunday. Since governor reappointed Ciza Thomas and K Sivaprasad as interim vice-chancellors (VCs) of Digital University Kerala (DUK) and APJ Abdul Kalam Technological University (KTU) respectively, overlooking the panels submitted by govt, the meeting with ministers isn't expected to bring about a significant change in the strained relations. The ministers were given time to meet the governor at chief minister Pinarayi Vijayan 's request to discuss the way forward in view of the Supreme Court directive to initiate proceedings for appointing regular VCs at the earliest. Vijayan had conveyed his disapproval of the new interim VCs and wanted candidates from govt's list to be appointed. "The ministers may only repeat what CM conveyed to governor through a letter. Govt is unlikely to soften its stand unless the first move towards reconciliation comes from Raj Bhavan," said govt sources. However, Raj Bhavan sources said state govt was taking the media for a ride by falsely accusing governor for reappointing interim VCs in the two universities. "Unlike what govt claims, the persons whom govt recommended as interim VCs were not eligible to the posts, as per conditions laid out in the respective acts and rules of the two universities," sources added. According to KTU and DUK acts, either a VC of a nearby university or the pro-VC of the same university can be appointed as interim VC. Though the acts say that the secretary of higher education can also be considered as interim VC, the Supreme Court has already ruled against such a proposition. "The chancellor can appoint persons recommended by govt only if govt recommends persons who fulfil the conditions stipulated in the university acts. Since none of the persons in the govt panel were eligible, the chancellor had no option but to reappoint the former VCs in charge. The SC also mentioned in the order that the chancellor is free to reappoint the former interim VCs for a six-month period," Raj Bhavan sources said. Meanwhile, state higher education principal secretary Sharmila Mary Joseph, who obtained an appointment to meet the governor at Raj Bhavan on Saturday, didn't turn up for the meeting. Get the latest lifestyle updates on Times of India, along with Friendship Day wishes , messages and quotes !


Time of India
38 minutes ago
- Time of India
Will Sean Diddy get a pardon? President Trump opens up on charges against the rapper
US President Donald Trump openly spoke about singer and rapper Sean Diddy Combs and said that he considers him 'sort of half-innocent' despite his criminal conviction in federal court in July 2025. The US president said that pardoning the music mogul was 'more difficult' because of past criticism. In an interview with Newsmax on Friday night, Trump said, 'He was essentially, I guess, sort of half-innocent.' 'He was celebrating a victory, but I guess it wasn't as good a victory,' he added. Explore courses from Top Institutes in Please select course: Select a Course Category Healthcare MBA Product Management Finance Degree MCA Management others Digital Marketing Leadership Operations Management Design Thinking healthcare Data Analytics Artificial Intelligence Data Science Data Science Project Management PGDM Technology Others Public Policy Cybersecurity CXO Skills you'll gain: Financial Analysis in Healthcare Financial Management & Investing Strategic Management in Healthcare Process Design & Analysis Duration: 12 Weeks Indian School of Business Certificate Program in Healthcare Management Starts on Jun 13, 2024 Get Details Combs, 55, was convicted in a New York federal court of two counts of transportation to engage in prostitution for flying people around the country, including his girlfriends and male sex workers, for sexual encounters, while he was acquitted of more serious charges. He could get up to a decade in prison at his sentencing set for Oct. 3. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Build Your Dream Villa Near Bengaluru Airport Sumadhura Group Learn More Undo According to The Guardian, several media outlets reported that Trump has been weighing a pardon for Combs. He has been seen partying in public and exchanging mutual declarations of friendship ahead of his two presidencies. Speaking about the music mogul, Trump said, 'When I ran for office, he was very hostile.' 'It's hard, you know? We're human beings. And we don't like to have things cloud our judgment, right? But when you knew someone and you were fine, and then you run for office, and he made some terrible statements. So I don't know … It makes it more difficult to do.' Live Events Combs had told The Daily Beast in 2017 that he did not 'really give a f**** about Trump,' according to The Guardian. When Trump's first presidency ended in 2020 following a defeat to Joe Biden, Combs, who is Black told radio host Charlamagne tha God that 'white men like Trump need to be banished.' 'The number one priority is to get Trump out of office,' Combs said. Sean 'Diddy' Combs asks judge to throw out guilty verdicts or grant him a new trial Meanwhile, Combs has asked a judge to throw out his guilty verdicts on prostitution-related counts or grant him a new trial, saying such convictions are without precedent. 'This conviction stands alone, but it shouldn't stand at all," the Wednesday filing said. Combs' lawyers argue that his two felony convictions were a unique misapplication of the federal Mann Act, which bars interstate commerce related to prostitution. 'To our knowledge, Mr. Combs is the only person ever convicted of violating the statute for conduct anything like this,' a Wednesday filing from Combs' legal team said.


The Hindu
an hour ago
- The Hindu
Why is northeast on edge about Assam evictions?
The story so far: The Assam government's drive to evict encroachers from forestlands has sent alarm bells ringing in other States of the region. Now, States bordering Assam are taking measures to ensure that those evicted from Assam do not cross over. When did the eviction drive start in Assam? The BJP came to power in 2016 by promising to secure jaati (race), maati (land), and bheti (hearth). Based on a Gauhati High Court order to reclaim encroached forestlands, the first eviction drive was carried out in three fringe villages of eastern Assam's Kaziranga National Park in September 2016. Two people died at Gorukhuti in north-central Assam's Darrang district when the eviction drive resumed in September 2021, five months after the BJP retained power and Himanta Biswa Sarma became Chief Minister. The eviction drives, allegedly targeted at Bengali Muslims, resumed in June 2025, coinciding with charges of corruption against the BJP-led government, one of them involving the purchase and redistribution of Gir cows for an agricultural project at Gorukhuti, from where migrant Muslims were evicted. What are the roots of the problem? Evicting encroachers from forestlands, wetlands, and government revenue lands is not a new phenomenon in Assam. However, the operation has been high on optics as the BJP and its sub-nationalist regional allies have accused the 15-year rule by Congress of having paved the ground for encroachment by the 'Bangladeshi', 'Miya', or 'illegal infiltrators' — pejoratives for Muslims with roots in present-day Bangladesh — for votes. This category of Muslims has long polarised electoral politics in Assam during and after the anti-foreigners Assam Agitation (1979-'85), which led to the signing of an accord prescribing a cut-off date — midnight of March 24, 1971 — for the detection, deletion (from electoral rolls), and deportation of 'illegal immigrants' or Bangladeshi nationals. Why is the drive overtly aggressive? The eviction drives have impacted non-Muslims as well, including 130 families whose houses were bulldozed to clear the Silsako Beel, a major wetland in Guwahati, of encroachment in 2022. Those against migrant Muslims, however, has garnered more attention for their scale and intensity, as it has led to the death of at least five people between 2016 and July 2025, when 1,080 families were evicted from 135 hectares of the Paikan Reserve Forest in Assam's Goalpara district. This aggression is also reflected in the rhetoric of the Chief Minister and other BJP leaders, who refer to the drive as a long-term exercise to save Assam from 'land jihad'. Before the drive was launched this year, the Chief Minister said 15,288.52 bighas of satra (Vaishnav monastery) lands remain illegally occupied by people of doubtful citizenship across 29 districts. He also referred to the Union Environment Ministry's report to the National Green Tribunal that 3,620.9 square kilometres of forest area in Assam were under encroachment as of March 2024. The Chief Minister vowed to continue the eviction drive until Assam is encroachment-free in 'at least 10 years', while clarifying that tribal people living in forest areas from before 2005 and covered by the Forest Rights Act would not be touched. This followed the fast-track resettlement of at least 12 Ahom families who were evicted along with migrant Muslims from village grazing reserves across four locations in northeastern Assam's Lakhimpur district. Why are Assam's neighbours jittery? Assam's neighbours were passive as long as the eviction drives were in areas far from the interstate borders. NGOs in Nagaland stirred into action after the Assam government announced an anti-encroachment drive in Golaghat district's Uriamghat. They saw it as a move to push 'illegal Bangladeshi immigrants' inside Nagaland under the agenda of usurping 'ancestral Naga lands'. Before the drive commenced, the police in Nagaland's Niuland district intercepted and turned 200 vehicles carrying 'illegal migrants' back to Assam. A few days later, a conglomerate of extremist groups announced a task force to guard the Assam-Nagaland border against infiltrators. The governments of Manipur, Meghalaya, Arunachal Pradesh, and Mizoram followed suit. They issued orders to the authorities in areas bordering Assam to increase vigilance, prevent the evicted people from coming in, and make the issuance of the inner-line permit, a temporary travel document, stricter. How are border disputes linked to eviction? Although opposition political parties in Assam see the eviction drive against Bengali-speaking Muslims as a part of the BJP's agenda of polarisation ahead of the 2026 Assembly polls, encroachment is at the core of the State's boundary disputes with Arunachal Pradesh, Meghalaya, Mizoram, and Nagaland. These States were carved out of Assam between 1963 and 1972. In March 2025, the Assam Assembly was told that the four States have been occupying almost 83,000 hectares of land belonging to the State. These States have, off and on, driven migrant Muslims out to Assam, a State they accuse of having patronised 'illegal immigrants' and made them settle along the borders as a ploy to claim disputed lands. More than 350 people have died due to the inter-State disputes, which Assam has partially resolved with Arunachal Pradesh and Meghalaya. On July 30, the Gauhati High Court directed these five States to constitute a high-level committee to facilitate a coordinated action to clear illegal settlements from forestlands.