US judge reaffirms nationwide injunction blocking Trump executive order on birthright citizenship

Straits Times

2 days ago

FILE PHOTO: U.S. President Donald Trump speaks to the media, after the U.S. Supreme Court dealt a blow to the power of federal judges by restricting their ability to grant broad legal relief in cases as the justices acted in a legal fight over President Donald Trump's bid to limit birthright citizenship, in the Press Briefing Room at the White House in Washington D.C., June 27, 2025. REUTERS/Ken Cedeno/File Photo
WASHINGTON - A federal judge in Massachusetts ruled on Friday that a nationwide injunction he issued in February that blocked President Donald Trump's executive order limiting birthright citizenship should remain in place.
In a written ruling, U.S. 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 U.S. 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.
Top stories
Swipe. Select. Stay informed.
Singapore SMRT to pay lower fine of $2.4m for EWL disruption; must invest at least $600k to boost reliability
Singapore MRT service changes needed to modify 3 East-West Line stations on Changi Airport stretch: LTA
Singapore S'pore could have nuclear energy 'within a few years', if it decides on it: UN nuclear watchdog chief
Asia 'Nothing like this has happened before': At least 16 dead as Thai-Cambodian conflict continues
Life 'Do you kill children?': Even before independence, S'pore has always loved its over-the-top campaigns
Singapore Lung damage, poor brain development, addiction: What vaping does to the body
Singapore Tipsy Collective sues former directors, HR head; alleges $14m lost from misconduct, poor decisions
Singapore Kopi, care and conversation: How this 20-year-old helps improve the well-being of the elderly
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 U.S. Constitution's 14th Amendment by denying citizenship to many persons born in the U.S., 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 U.S.-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. REUTERS