US appeals court blocks Trump's order curtailing birthright citizenship
The 2-1 decision by the San Francisco-based 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals marked the first time an appeals court has assessed the legality of Trump's order since the US Supreme Court in June curbed the power of lower court judges to enjoin that and other federal policies on a nationwide basis.
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 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 nationally 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.
The 9th Circuit's majority in Wednesday's ruling said the Democratic-led states that had sued to block the policy — Washington, Arizona, Illinois and Oregon — likewise still were entitled to a nationwide injunction as a more narrow order would not provide them 'complete relief'.
'The court agrees that the president cannot redefine what it means to be American with the stroke of a pen,' Washington attorney-general Nick Brown said in a statement.
The Trump administration could either ask a wider panel of 9th Circuit judges to hear the case or appeal directly to the Supreme Court, which is expected to have the final word in the litigation.
'We look forward to being vindicated on appeal,' said White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson. In a statement, she said the 9th Circuit misinterpreted the US constitution's 14th Amendment in reaching its decision.
Trump signed the order on January 20, his first day back in office, as part of his hardline approach towards immigration.
Trump's order directed federal agencies to refuse to recognise 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 violates the citizenship clause of the US constitution's 14th Amendment, long been understood to recognise that virtually anyone born in the US is a citizen.
The constitution's 14th Amendment citizenship clause states that all 'persons born or naturalised in the US, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the US and of the state wherein they reside'.
The first judge to block Trump's directive was Seattle-based US District judge John Coughenour, an appointee of Republican president Ronald Reagan, who called it 'blatantly unconstitutional'. The 9th Circuit's ruling upheld his decision.
US Circuit judge Ronald Gould, writing for Wednesday's majority, said Coughenour rightly concluded that 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.
Gould said a geographically limited injunction would harm the four states by forcing them to overhaul their government benefits programmes to account for how people denied citizenship under Trump's order might move into them.
'It is impossible to avoid this harm absent a uniform application of the citizenship clause throughout the US,' Gould wrote.
His opinion was joined by US Circuit judge Michael Hawkins, a fellow appointee of Democratic president Bill Clinton.
US Circuit judge Patrick Bumatay, a Trump appointee, dissented, saying in his view the Democratic-led states lacked standing to challenge Trump's order, as he warned of the risks of 'judicial overreach'.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Star
5 hours ago
- The Star
US to punish top ANC officials over foreign policy, graft allegations
President Cyril Ramaphosa Former South African ambassador to US, Ebrahim Rasool. ANC first deputy secretary general Nomvula Mokonyane. South Africa's relationship with the United States is on a diplomatic knife-edge, as the U.S. House Foreign Affairs Committee push forward a bill that could see senior African National Congress (ANC) leaders hit with sanctions, including travel bans and asset freezes. The proposed U.S. – South Africa Bilateral Relations Review Act of 2025 calls for a sweeping 120-day probe into Pretoria's foreign policy stance, targeting individuals accused of corruption or of acting against American interests. The looming sanctions have intensified diplomatic tensions, placing several senior ANC figures squarely in the crosshairs. President Cyril Ramaphosa, ANC National Chairperson Gwede Mantashe, former International Relations Minister Dr. Naledi Pandor, ANC First Deputy Secretary-General Nomvula Mokonyane, and former U.S. Ambassador Ebrahim Rasool have all been flagged as potential targets of the proposed U.S. action. The bill's advancement has triggered a political storm in Pretoria, with ANC leaders condemning it as an affront to South Africa's sovereignty and its right to pursue an independent foreign policy. Although the U.S. legislation stops short of naming individuals, growing pressure is falling squarely on President Ramaphosa and his cabinet, whose diplomatic choices have increasingly drawn fire from U.S. lawmakers. At the heart of the growing rift is South Africa's vocal and consistent defence of Palestine. Pretoria has become one of the strongest international voices condemning Israel's war on Palestinians, and this has not gone unnoticed in Washington. The South African government's move to initiate a case at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) accusing Israel of genocide in Gaza was seen as a deliberate shift away from its previously neutral stance on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Alongside this, Pretoria's growing alignment with Russia, China, and Iran has further strained its relationship with the U.S., who view these ties as contradictory to American geopolitical interests. President Ramaphosa, who has steered South Africa's foreign policy in this direction, faces intense scrutiny. His administration's engagement with Russia and its stance on the Middle East has drawn sharp rebuke from U.S. lawmakers, who have accused South Africa of aligning with authoritarian regimes and undermining democratic values. U.S. diplomats have expressed frustration over Ramaphosa's outspoken criticism of U.S. policy, particularly on issues such as Israel and the war in Gaza. In June, IOL reported that President Ramaphosa released a cautious statement calling for dialogue and a peaceful resolution to rising geopolitical tensions. His remarks highlighted South Africa's sensitive diplomatic position, balancing its longstanding relationship with Iran and its vocal criticism of Israel's actions in Gaza. 'President Cyril Ramaphosa and the South African government have noted with a great deal of anxiety the entry by the United States of America into the Israel-Iran war," the statement read. 'It was South Africa's sincerest hope that President Donald Trump would use his influence and that of the US government to prevail on the parties to pursue a dialogue path in resolving their issues of dispute. 'South Africa calls on the United States, Israel, and Iran to give the United Nations the opportunity and space to lead on the peaceful resolution of the matters of dispute, including the inspection and verification of Iran's status of uranium enrichment, as well as its broader nuclear capacity,' the statement reads. Gwede Mantashe, serving as both ANC National Chairperson and Minister of Mineral Resources and Energy, is among those who could come under scrutiny. He was named in the Zondo Commission report, which linked him to alleged corrupt dealings with the now-defunct facilities company Bosasa. The report detailed claims that Mantashe received illicit security upgrades at his properties, allegations he has consistently denied, but which continue to cast a shadow over his political standing. Nomvula Mokonyane, ANC First Deputy Secretary-General and former Minister of Environmental Affairs, also appears to be in Washington's sights. Her alleged involvement in the Bosasa corruption scandal remains a point of concern, but it is her recent proposal to rename Sandton Drive, where the U.S. Consulate is located, to 'Leila Khaled Drive' that has drawn international attention. Khaled, a Palestinian militant associated with plane hijackings and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), a group designated as a terrorist organisation by the U.S., has made Mokonyane's comments especially controversial, sparking widespread outrage and potentially deepening the diplomatic rift. Then there is Dr. Naledi Pandor, South Africa's former Minister of International Relations and Cooperation, who has emerged as a central figure in the foreign policy debate. Her vocal defence of South Africa's position on Israel, along with continued diplomatic engagement with Iran and Hamas, has made her a lightning rod for criticism. U.S. lawmakers have accused Pandor of steering South Africa toward increasingly adversarial alliances, arguing that her actions are undermining the country's longstanding relationship with the West. Ibrahim Rasool, former South African Ambassador to the United States, has also come under scrutiny from U.S. lawmakers. Known for his outspoken criticism of U.S. foreign policy, especially regarding the Middle East and Israel, Rasool has often been at odds with American diplomats. His influential role in shaping the ANC's foreign policy during the Obama administration is now being reexamined amid Washington's broader review of its diplomatic relationship with South Africa. The ANC's response has been one of defiance, with ANC Secretary-General Fikile Mbalula condemning the bill as an 'attack on our sovereignty.' Mbalula has warned that the proposed sanctions are part of a broader U.S. effort to undermine South Africa's political independence and foreign policy decisions. "There is no justification for sanctions against our leaders simply for standing up for what we believe is right, especially on the issue of Palestine," Mbalula said in a statement. While the US sanctions bill may pass into law, it is far from certain that the Trump administration will take immediate action. Joel Pollak, a former senior fellow at the Hudson Institute, suggested that the sanctions would likely be targeted at individuals deemed to be responsible for actions that go against U.S. interests. 'The Magnitsky Act is about holding people accountable for undermining democracy and supporting corrupt practices. This is not an attempt to punish South Africa, but to target those who undermine key democratic norms,' Pollak said. As the U.S. Congress moves closer to passing the bill, South Africa faces a crossroads in its relationship with the United States. Should the sanctions go ahead, it will signal a significant shift in South Africa's international standing, particularly with the U.S., and potentially mark the beginning of a new phase in its foreign policy, where its support for Palestine and criticism of Western powers takes centre stage. The Star [email protected]
Daily Maverick
6 hours ago
- Daily Maverick
US and EU clinch deal with broad 15% tariffs on EU goods to avert trade war
Deal includes $600 billion EU investments in US, more EU energy, defence purchases 15% tariff better than threatened 30%, in deal mirroring Japan's US steel and aluminium tariffs remain at 50% By Andrew Gray and Andrea Shalal The announcement came after European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen travelled for talks with U.S. President Donald Trump at his golf course in western Scotland to push a hard-fought deal over the line. 'I think this is the biggest deal ever made,' Trump told reporters after an hour-long meeting with von der Leyen, who said the 15% tariff applied 'across the board'. 'We have a trade deal between the two largest economies in the world, and it's a big deal. It's a huge deal. It will bring stability. It will bring predictability,' she said. The deal, that also includes $600 billion of EU investments in the United States and significant EU purchases of U.S. energy and military equipment, will indeed bring clarity for EU companies. However, the baseline tariff of 15% will be seen by many in Europe as a poor outcome compared to the initial European ambition of a zero-for-zero tariff deal, although it is better than the threatened 30% rate. The deal mirrors parts of the framework agreement the United States clinched with Japan last week. 'We are agreeing that the tariff… for automobiles and everything else will be a straight across tariff of 15%,' Trump said. However, the 15% baseline rate would not apply to steel and aluminium, for which a 50% tariff would remain in place. Trump, who is seeking to reorder the global economy and reduce decades-old U.S. trade deficits, has so far reeled in agreements with Britain, Japan, Indonesia and Vietnam, although his administration has failed to deliver on a promise of '90 deals in 90 days.' He has periodically railed against the European Union saying it was 'formed to screw the United States' on trade. Arriving in Scotland, Trump said that the EU wanted 'to make a deal very badly' and said, as he met von der Leyen, that Europe had been 'very unfair to the United States'. His main bugbear is the U.S. merchandise trade deficit with the EU, which in 2024 reached $235 billion, according to U.S. Census Bureau data. The EU points to the U.S. surplus in services, which it says partially redresses the balance. Trump also talked on Sunday about the 'hundreds of billions of dollars' that tariffs were bringing in. On July 12, Trump threatened to apply a 30% tariff on imports from the EU starting on August 1, after weeks of negotiations with the major U.S. trading partners failed to reach a comprehensive trade deal. The EU had prepared countertariffs on 93 billion euros ($109 billion) of U.S. goods in the event there was no deal and Trump had pressed ahead with 30% tariffs. Some member states had also pushed for the bloc to use its most powerful trade weapon, the anti-coercion instrument, to target U.S. services in the event of a no-deal.
The South African
6 hours ago
- The South African
Was the Butler 'assassination attempt' on Donald Trump staged?
Is it remotely possible that showman, actor, TV producer and all-round heavyweight bullsh*tter Donald J. Trump was involved in staging the alleged 'assassination attempt' on him in Butler, Pennsylvania on 13 July last year? Because as many analysts, investigators and internet sleuths are pointing out…the 'official explanation' is riddled with weird and confounding inconsistencies. In a recent episode of his talk show, MOATS, British MP and political analyst, George Galloway, raised an interesting, important and pertinent question: 'Whatever happened to the guy…who came so close to murdering Donald Trump at Butler, PA?' Galloway asked. 'Why do I know less about him than I know about the latest K-pop star singing, You're My Little Soda Pop ? Why do I know more about Little Soda Pop than I do about the guy who drew blood, in broad daylight, by firing a bullet into the face of the man who was about to be the president of the United States?' 'I know nothing about him,' Galloway said. 'Haven't seen his manifesto. Know nothing about his motives, his associates, or who he was in touch with in the minutes, hours and days…before he came so close to changing the entire course of world history. 'Is that not a bit suspicious? Just saying…' Good question. Suspicious indeed. And it gets even more suspicious. On the anniversary of the Butler assassination attempt this year, Congress released a report detailing failures by the United States Secret Service (USSS) that allowed the 13 July 2024 attempted assassination of presidential candidate Donald J. Trump during a campaign rally in Butler, Pennsylvania, to nearly succeed. The report unveiled by US Kentucky Republican Senator Rand Paul, chairman of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, exposes a disturbing pattern of denials, mismanagement, and missed warning signs – some occurring just minutes before shots were fired. Among the failures by the USSS documented in the report are 'inexcusable negligence, communication breakdowns, systemic weaknesses, and limited accountability'. The report states (summary): 'On July 13, 2024, a gunman climbed onto the roof of the American Glass Research building near the Butler Farm Show rally and opened fire, striking four individuals, including President Trump, and killing firefighter Corey Comperatore. The shooter had been reported to the Secret Service as suspicious and with a rangefinder at least 25 minutes earlier.' 'What happened in Butler, Pennsylvania, was not just a tragedy—it was a scandal. The United States Secret Service failed to act on credible intelligence, failed to coordinate with local law enforcement, and failed to prevent an attack that nearly took the life of a then-former president,' said chairman Paul. 'Despite those failures, no one has been fired. That's unacceptable. This was not a single lapse in judgment. It was a complete breakdown of security at every level—fueled by bureaucratic indifference, a lack of clear protocols, and a shocking refusal to act on direct threats.' Almost as if responding to Galloway's good question, political and media (and 'conspiracy theory') analysts, Keaton Weiss and Russell Dobular from Due Dissidence recently did a collating deep dive into the 'suspicious' mystery behind Trump's near murder and would-be assassin. In his introduction, Dobular announced, 'We're going to go Oliver Stone on this.' Citing director Stone's masterpiece film, JFK , he said, 'Stone presented a theory, and that theory was: Even if you don't think this is what happened, the 'official story' is not what happened, based on the evidence.' He added, 'There are a lot of weird things about this assassination attempt.' In a video titled, More Questions than Answers , here's what DD unpacked… The duo started by playing a clip from a video posted on X by alt news/media site HOT SPOT. The description in the post says, 'Footage of the attempted Trump assassination in Butler, PA shows a man lining up photographers at the precise moment the most effective campaign photo in US history was captured.' After the shooter fired on Trump, Keaton Weiss pointed out how bizarre it was that the Secret Service agent was concerned about coordinating the photographers. 'Your job is to protect the president, not the photographers, right?' Weiss said. 'Why are you corralling them? It's weird.' Dobular, a self-admitted 'theatre dork', questioned the strange decision by the SS to bring Trump 'downstage centre' (the part of a stage that's closest to the audience). 'This is an active shooter situation,' Dobular said. 'Why would you bring him downstage centre? That to me is the most suspicious part of this footage.' The video clip got to the part where shots have just rung out, and the SS have Trump on the ground and covered. And then, they again do something that was bewilderingly strange and reckless. They pick Trump up, exposing him to the shooter. Dobular paused the clip and asked the obvious question. 'So they got him down, which is what you'd expect. Why would you lift him up? Why would you expose him like that?' THE WAPO BODYCAM POV – TRUMP PAUSES FOR A PHOTO OP Russell then ran a clip of another angle – from the Washington Post; the POV of a photographer wearing a GoPro or body cam. 'This was definitely one of the photographers that the Secret Service guy was corralling', Weiss indicated. To which Dobular responded, 'Again, why would you position him like that in an active shooter situation? That is really the most suspicious thing in all of this.' In the POV clip, Trump can be seen forcing his SS guards to pause his rapid exit, as he raised his fist for that iconic photo-op moment, and shouted to the crowd, 'Fight!'. Dobular brought up another X post, by alt news/media platform, RAWSALERTS. It's allegedly a photo of the bullet whizzing past Trump's head. He then brought up several photos from different accounts questioning the blood, and lack of scar tissue on Trump's ear – and how quickly it seemed to heal. Commenting on the images and posts, Dobular said: 'A lot of people have pointed out the ear, claiming the blood should be dripping. Some pointed out there's no scarring in the ear. I personally don't think you see scar tissue there.' Dobular also ran a video of interviews with multiple witnesses who pointed out the shooter in advance when they saw him behaving 'suspiciously' and climbing onto the roof, but were ignored by police and SS. By late July, less than two weeks after the shooting, new photos emerged of Trump's ear apparently miraculously completely healed. On 8 August 2024, less than a month after the shooting – and the Republican National Convention where Trump was seen wearing a bandage on his ear – Trump was interviewed by the media at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida, without the ear bandage. When a reporter asked about the absence of the bandage, in true narcissistic Trump fashion, The Don answered: 'I'm a fast healer. It's a helluva shot, but I'm a fast healer. Yeah, pretty much recovered.' 'I got very lucky. It just hit the lobe – as they call it,' he added. On 28 February, Elon Musk made another appearance on the Joe Rogan show. The subject of Trump's near-assassination came up. Along with some good questions about some very strange inconsistencies. As Rogan pointed out, the house of the (alleged) shooter, Thomas Matthew Crooks, had been 'professionally' scrubbed, and Crooks had no internet or social media footprint. Here Musk interjected, 'Yeah, there's zero per cent chance that he has no social media footprint.' Rogan continued, 'With this kid, we don't know anything, right? And everyone's stopped asking questions. There was never a formal report or press conference where they detailed all the information we know currently and where the investigation stands. At the moment, what we know is you have a very young kid who was filmed, they knew he was there – with a rangefinder – half an hour before the event.' He pointed out, 'You also know that CNN streamed it live – which I do not believe they did for any other rally and certainly not for a rally that's in the middle of nowhere in Pennsylvania.' Among the other anomalies in the case, Rogan also brought up 'the kid had 5 phones, that's a lot of phones for a 20-year-old kid. One of them was tracked to outside FBI offices several times.' 'There's a lot of weird shit', Rogan added. THE HIGGINS REPORT – 'THE BODY IS GONE' In early August 2024, Louisiana Republican Clay Higgins, a member of the House Task Team investigating the assassination attempt, was in Butler asking the coroner if he could investigate the body of Thomas Crooks – only to be told, 'the body is gone'. In his report submitted to the Task Force Chairman on 12 August, Higgins wrote: 'My effort to examine Crooks' body on Monday, 5 August, caused quite a stir and revealed a disturbing fact… the FBI released the body for cremation 10 days after J13.' 'On J23, Crooks was gone', Higgins reported. 'Nobody knew this until 5 August, including the County Coroner, law enforcement, Sheriff, etc.' Higgins said the Butler County Coroner 'technically had legal authority over the body, but I spoke with the Coroner, and he would have never released Crooks' body to the family for cremation or burial without specific permission from the FBI'. He also wrote that 'similar to scrubbing crime scene biological evidence … this action by the FBI can only be described as an obstruction to any investigative effort.' 'THE 'OFFICIAL STORY' IS NOT WHAT HAPPENED' In the course of the deep dive by Dissidence , Russell Dobular said, 'In my entire life, there has never been a would-be assassin as invisibilized as this assassin. I didn't know his name until I did the research for this.' Wrapping up their video, Dobular made his position and personal opinion on the 'assassination attempt' clear. 'Given how things have evolved since Trump became president…I believe this was staged to ensure that he would become president', he said. 'Nobody could ever prove that – but that's my opinion based on the evidence.' 'There's a lot of weird stuff. I think we can say, conclusively, that the story we're being told is not the truth. Clearly, there is a cover-up here. Whatever you believe about that, there's a cover-up.' He added, 'What the nature of it is, we don't know.' Let us know by leaving a comment below or send a WhatsApp to 060 011 021 1. Subscribe to The South African website's newsletters and follow us on WhatsApp, Facebook, X, and Bluesky for the latest news.
