U.S. judge weighs putting new block on Trump's birthright citizenship order
By Jan Wolfe
A group of Democratic-led states urged a federal judge in Boston on Friday to deal another blow to President Donald Trump's attempts to limit birthright citizenship, even though a U.S. Supreme Court decision last month made it more difficult for lower courts to block White House directives.
Lawyers for New Jersey, arguing on behalf of 18 states and the District of Columbia, urged U.S. District Judge Leo Sorokin to maintain an injunction he imposed in February that blocked Trump's executive order nationwide.
The states' case is back in Sorokin's courtroom so he can assess the impact of the Supreme Court's landmark June 27 decision. In that 6-3 ruling authored by conservative Justice Amy Coney Barrett, the court directed lower court judges like Sorokin that had blocked Trump's policy to reconsider the scope of their orders.
Trump's executive order was already halted again last week by a different judge in New Hampshire, but a win in Sorokin's courtroom would give critics of the Trump policy another boost in litigation that is widely expected to end up back before the Supreme Court.
Shankar Duraiswamy, an attorney for New Jersey, told Sorokin that the Supreme Court decision made clear that nationwide injunctions are permissible if they are the only way to provide "complete relief" to litigants in a particular lawsuit.
A nationwide block on Trump's executive order is the only way to avoid massive administrative upheaval for state governments, Duraiswamy said.
Restricting birthright citizenship in some states but not others would make it difficult to administer federal benefits programs like Medicaid, he argued. This 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, he said.
"Half-measures are not warranted when enjoining a flagrantly unconstitutional executive action," Duraiswamy said, adding that the Trump administration "wants to rush forward with an unprecedented sea change in how citizenship is understood."
Justice Department lawyer Eric Hamilton countered that, by continuing to advocate for universal relief, the states had failed to come to grips with the Supreme Court's decision.
Hamilton said the burden is on the states to propose a narrower relief but they have failed to do so. He also argued the states were alleging fundamentally monetary harms, which are typically not addressed through injunctions.
Sorokin told him that the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals had already rejected that argument in an earlier decision that left his injunction in place.
"We are not asking this court to do anything contrary to circuit precedent," Hamilton said.
"But it seems like you are," the judge replied.
Sorokin said he planned to issue a written decision in the coming weeks.
Trump's executive order directed U.S. agencies to refuse to recognize the citizenship of children born in the United States after February 19 if neither their mother nor father is a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident.
Rather than address the legality of Trump's executive order, the Supreme Court in its June ruling used the case to discourage nationwide, or 'universal,' injunctions — in which a single district court judge can block enforcement of a federal policy across the country.
But the court raised the possibility that universal injunctions are still permissible in certain circumstances, including class actions, in which similarly situated people sue as a group, or if they are the only way to provide "complete relief" to litigants in a particular lawsuit.
A ruling from Sorokin, an appointee of Democratic President Barack Obama, in favor of the states would be the second blow to Trump's executive order this month. On July 10 at a hearing in New Hampshire, U.S. District Judge Joseph Laplante, an appointee of Republican president George W. Bush, issued a nationwide injunction blocking Trump's order after he found that children whose citizenship status would be threatened by it could pursue their lawsuit as a class action.
The Democratic-led states, backed by immigrant rights groups, argue the White House directive violated a right enshrined in the U.S. Constitution's 14th Amendment that guarantees that virtually anyone born in the United States is a citizen.
The Justice Department has argued that the Supreme Court has never ruled directly on the interpretation of birthright citizenship advanced by Trump, which they assert is consistent with the Constitution's text.
© Thomson Reuters 2025.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Japan Today
an hour ago
- Japan Today
Viral 'honour' killing in southwest Pakistan triggers national outrage
FILE PHOTO: Policewomen escort Gul Jan Bibi (C), mother of Bano Bibi, who along with a man was killed after being accused of having an affair, in a so-called honour killing after a video showing the couple being shot went viral on social media, at a local court in Quetta, Pakistan July 26, 2025. REUTERS/Abdul Wali/File Photo By Ariba Shahid A viral video of the "honour killing" of a woman and her lover in a remote part of Pakistan has ignited national outrage, prompting scrutiny of long-standing tribal codes and calls for justice in a country where such killings often pass in silence. While hundreds of so-called honour killings are reported in Pakistan each year, often with little public or legal response, the video of a woman and man accused of adultery being taken to the desert by a group of men to be killed has struck a nerve. The video shows the woman, Bano Bibi, being handed a Koran by a man identified by police as her brother. "Come walk seven steps with me, after that you can shoot me," she says, and she walks forward a few feet and stops with her back to the men. The brother, Jalal Satakzai, then shoots her three times and she collapses. Seconds later he shoots and kills the man, Ehsan Ullah Samalani, whom Bano was accused of having an affair with. Once the video of the killings in Pakistan's Balochistan province went viral, it brought swift government action and condemnation from politicians, rights groups and clerics. Civil rights lawyer Jibran Nasir said, though, the government's response was more about performance than justice. "The crime occurred months ago, not in secrecy but near a provincial capital, yet no one acted until 240 million witnessed the killing on camera," he said. "This isn't a response to a crime. It's a response to a viral moment." Police have arrested 16 people in Balochistan's Nasirabad district, including a tribal chief and the woman's mother. The mother, Gul Jan Bibi, said the killings were carried out by family and local elders based on "centuries-old Baloch traditions", and not on the orders of the tribal chief. "We did not commit any sin," she said in a video statement that also went viral. "Bano and Ehsan were killed according to our customs." She said her daughter, who had three sons and two daughters, had run away with Ehsan and returned after 25 days. Police said Bano's younger brother, who shot the couple, remains at large. Balochistan Chief Minister Sarfraz Bugti said it was a "test" case and vowed to dismantle the illegal tribal courts operating outside the law. Police had earlier said a jirga, an informal tribal council that issues extrajudicial rulings, had ordered the killings. JusticeForCouple The video sparked online condemnation, with hashtags like #JusticeForCouple and #HonourKilling trending. The Pakistan Ulema Council, a body of religious scholars, called the killings "un-Islamic" and urged terrorism charges against those involved. Dozens of civil society members and rights activists staged a protest on Saturday in the provincial capital Quetta, demanding justice and an end to parallel justice systems. "Virality is a double-edged sword," said Arsalan Khan, a cultural anthropologist and professor who studies gender and masculinity. "It can pressure the state into action, but public spectacle can also serve as a strategy to restore ghairat, or perceived family honour, in the eyes of the community." Pakistan outlawed honour killings in 2016 after the murder of social media star Qandeel Baloch, closing a loophole that allowed perpetrators to go free if they were pardoned by family members. Rights groups say enforcement remains weak, especially in rural areas where tribal councils still hold sway. "In a country where conviction rates often fall to single digits, visibility - and the uproar it brings - has its advantages," said constitutional lawyer Asad Rahim Khan. "It jolts a complacent state that continues to tolerate jirgas in areas beyond its writ." The Human Rights Commission of Pakistan reported at least 405 honour killings in 2024. Most victims are women, often killed by relatives claiming to defend family honour. Khan said rather than enforcing the law, the government has spent the past year weakening the judiciary and even considering reviving jirgas in former tribal areas. "It's executive inaction, most shamefully toward women in Balochistan," Khan said. Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif in recent months has asked senior ministers to evaluate proposals to revive jirgas in Pakistan's former tribal districts, including potential engagement with tribal elders and Afghan authorities. The Prime Minister's Office and Pakistan's information minister did not immediately respond to a request for comment. VIRAL AND THEN FORGOTTEN? The Balochistan killings were raised in Pakistan's Senate, where the human rights committee condemned the murders and called for action against those who convened the jirga. Lawmakers also warned that impunity for parallel justice systems risked encouraging similar violence. Activists and analysts, however, say the outrage is unlikely to be sustained. "There's noise now, but like every time, it will fade," said Jalila Haider, a human rights lawyer in Quetta. "In many areas, there is no writ of law, no enforcement. Only silence." Haider said the killings underscore the state's failure to protect citizens in under-governed regions like Balochistan, where tribal power structures fill the vacuum left by absent courts and police. "It's not enough to just condemn jirgas," Haider said. "The real question is: why does the state allow them to exist in the first place?" © (c) Copyright Thomson Reuters 2025.
Japan Today
an hour ago
- Japan Today
U.S. tariff tussles stuff of nightmares for Bordeaux winemakers
A visitor enjoys the Bordeaux wine festival -- but US tariffs will hit hard a sector already under pressure By Marisol RIFAI French wine producers, already reeling from a downturn in their market, still do not know how bitter a taste the U.S. tariffs on wine will leave on their palates. In southwestern France, around the Bordeaux region's famed vineyards, months of talk on what U.S. President Donald Trump will decide on tariffs have been the stuff of nightmares for producers as they look on helplessly. The United States is by far the top export market for Bordeaux's wine, accounting for 400 million euros ($470 million) worth of annual sales -- or about 20 percent of the total. China lags behind with 300 million euros ahead of the United Kingdom with 200 million. Sunday's announcement of a trade deal between the United States and the European Union did not clear up what tariffs European wine and spirits producers will face in the United States. While Trump said European exports face 15 percent tariffs across the board, both sides said there would be carve-outs for certain sectors. EU head Ursula Von der Leyen said the bloc still hoped to secure further so-called "zero-for-zero" agreements, notably for alcohol, which she hoped to be "sorted out" in the coming days. Philippe Tapie, chairman of regional traders' union Bordeaux Negoce, which represents more than 90 percent of the wine trade in the Bordeaux area, is worried by the uncertainty. "One day, it is white, the next it is black -- the U.S. administration can change its mind from one day to the next and we have no visibility," he told AFP. In mid-March, Trump had threatened Brussels with 200 percent tariffs on alcohol in response to a proposed EU tax on U.S. bourbon. Then in April he brandished a new threat of 20 percent across the board on EU products, a threat ultimately suspended. Since then, the level first held at ten percent but, in late May, the U.S. leader threatened to revert to 50 percent before pivoting to 30 percent starting August 1st, the deadline for the negotiations with the EU that led to a preliminary accord after Trump and Von der Leyen met in Scotland on Sunday. "At 10 percent or 15 percent, we'll find solutions. At 30 percent, no. End of story," Tapie warned just ahead of the announcement as he criticized a "totally unpredictable American administration". To export wine, "there's a minimum of 30 days by boat. If you go to California, it's 60 days. We can't think in terms of weeks," says Tapie, who says he has "never been confronted with such a situation" in 30 years of business. Twins Bordeaux, one of Bordeaux's leading wine merchants, also laments the tariffs' impact. "The American market represents about a third of our turnover, or around 30 million euros," explains Sebastien Moses, co-director and co-owner of Twins, which usually ships upwards of a million bottles a year to the United States. Since January, "our turnover must have fallen by 50 percent compared to last year," he says. "So far, we've managed to save the situation, because as soon as Donald Trump was elected we anticipated this and sent as much stock as possible to the U.S.," explains Moses, though longer term he says this is not a "stable" strategy. As an attempted work around Twins Bordeaux even shipped cases of around 10,000 bottles by air in March. "But only very expensive wines, at no less than 150-200 euros per bottle, because by air it's at least two and a half times the price of shipping by sea," he said. For Bordeaux wine merchant Bouey, the U.S. market represents less than 10 percent of its exports. "We have long since undertaken a geographical expansion. Faced with the global chaos, commercial strategies can no longer be based on a single- or dual-country strategy," Jacques Bouey, its CEO, told AFP in April. The tariffs come with the industry already struggling with declining consumption that has led to overproduction and a collapse in bulk prices. By early 2023, a third of Bordeaux's approximately 5,000 wine growers admitted to being in difficulty. "We're starting to become world champions in terms of accumulating problems," complained Tapie. © 2025 AFP
Japan Today
an hour ago
- Japan Today
US, China to launch new talks on tariff truce extension, easing path for Trump-Xi meeting
FILE PHOTO: The American and Chinese flags are photographed on the negotiating table, during a bilateral meeting between the United States and China, in Geneva, Switzerland, May 10, 2025. KEYSTONE/EDA/Martial Trezzini/Handout via REUTERS/ File Photo By David Lawder Top U.S. and Chinese economic officials will resume talks in Stockholm on Monday to try to tackle longstanding economic disputes at the centre of a trade war between the world's top two economies, aiming to extend a truce by three months and keeping sharply higher tariffs at bay. China is facing an August 12 deadline to reach a durable tariff agreement with President Donald Trump's administration, after Beijing and Washington reached preliminary deals in May and June to end weeks of escalating tit-for-tat tariffs and a cut-off of rare earth minerals. Without an agreement, global supply chains could face renewed turmoil from U.S. duties snapping back to triple-digit levels that would amount to a bilateral trade embargo. The Stockholm talks come hot on the heels of Trump's biggest trade deal yet with the European Union on Sunday for a 15% tariff on most EU goods exports to the U.S., including autos. The bloc will also buy $750 billion worth of American energy and make $600 billion worth of U.S. investments in coming years. No similar breakthrough is expected in the U.S.-China talks but trade analysts said that another 90-day extension of a tariff and export control truce struck in mid-May was likely. An extension of that length would prevent further escalation and facilitate planning for a potential meeting between Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping in late October or early November. A U.S. Treasury spokesperson declined comment on a South China Morning Post report quoting unnamed sources as saying the two sides would refrain from introducing new tariffs or other steps that could escalate the trade war for another 90 days. Trump's administration is poised to impose new sectoral tariffs that will impact China within weeks, including on semiconductors, pharmaceuticals, ship-to-shore cranes and other products. "We're very close to a deal with China. We really sort of made a deal with China, but we'll see how that goes," Trump told reporters on Sunday before European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen struck their tariff deal. The Financial Times reported on Monday that the U.S. had paused curbs on tech exports to China to avoid disrupting trade talks with Beijing and support Trump's efforts to secure a meeting with Xi this year. The industry and security bureau of the Commerce Department, which oversees export controls, had been told to avoid tough moves on China, the newspaper said, citing current and former officials. Reuters could not immediately verify the report. The White House and the department did not respond to Reuters' requests for comment outside business hours. DEEPER ISSUES Previous U.S.-China trade talks in Geneva and London in May and June focused on bringing U.S. and Chinese retaliatory tariffs down from triple-digit levels and restoring the flow of rare earth minerals halted by China and Nvidia's H20 AI chips and other goods halted by the United States. So far, the talks have not delved into broader economic issues. They include U.S. complaints that China's state-led, export-driven model is flooding world markets with cheap goods, and Beijing's complaints that U.S. national security export controls on tech goods seek to stunt Chinese growth. "Geneva and London were really just about trying to get the relationship back on track so that they could, at some point, actually negotiate about the issues which animate the disagreement between the countries in the first place," said Scott Kennedy, a China economics expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington. "I'd be surprised if there is an early harvest on some of these things but an extension of the ceasefire for another 90 days seems to be the most likely outcome," Kennedy said. U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has already flagged a deadline extension and has said he wants China to rebalance its economy away from exports to more domestic consumption -- a decades-long goal for U.S. policymakers. Analysts say the U.S.-China negotiations are far more complex than those with other Asian countries and will require more time. China's grip on the global market for rare earth minerals and magnets, used in everything from military hardware to car windshield wiper motors, has proved to be an effective leverage point on U.S. industries. TRUMP-XI MEETING? In the background of the talks is speculation about a possible meeting between Trump and Xi in late October. Trump has said he will decide soon on a landmark trip to China, and a new flare-up of tariffs and export controls would likely derail planning. Sun Chenghao, a fellow at Tsinghua University's Center for International Security and Strategy in Beijing, said that a Trump-Xi summit would be an opportunity for the U.S. to lower the 20% tariffs on Chinese goods related to fentanyl. In exchange, he said the Chinese side could make good on its 2020 pledge to increase purchases of U.S. farm products and other goods. "The future prospect of the heads of state summit is very beneficial to the negotiations because everyone wants to reach an agreement or pave the way in advance," Sun said. Still, China will likely request a reduction of multi-layered U.S. tariffs totaling 55% on most goods and further easing of U.S. high-tech export controls, analysts said. Beijing has argued that such purchases would help reduce the U.S. trade deficit with China, which reached $295.5 billion in 2024. © (c) Copyright Thomson Reuters 2025.
