US birthright citizenship protected — for now — as judge pauses Trump's executive order
The high court's conservative majority delivered a landmark decision in late June that limits the ability of individual judges to issue nationwide injunctions against presidents' policies.
Several such judges had in fact blocked Trump's attempt to end the longstanding rule, guaranteed in the US Constitution, that anyone born on US soil is automatically an American citizen.
However, the Supreme Court left open the possibility that orders could be blocked via broad class-action suits against the government.
Trump's opponents quickly filed new class-action suits seeking to block again the executive order.
Yesterday, Judge Joseph Laplante of the US District of New Hampshire granted class-action status to any child who would potentially be denied citizenship under Trump's order. The judge ordered a preliminary halt to it as legal proceedings carry on.
The judge delayed his ruling for seven days to permit the Trump administration to appeal.
Cody Wofsy, a lawyer with the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) who argued the case, called the ruling a 'huge victory' that 'will help protect the citizenship of all children born in the United States, as the Constitution intended.'
Trump's executive order decrees that children born to parents in the United States illegally or on temporary visas would not automatically become citizens—a radical reinterpretation of the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution.
His administration has argued that the 14th Amendment, passed in the wake of the Civil War, addresses the rights of former slaves and not the children of undocumented migrants or temporary US visitors.
The Supreme Court rejected such a narrow definition in a landmark 1898 case.
The current high court, with a 6-3 conservative majority, avoided ruling last month on the constitutionality of Trump's executive order and only addressed the issue of nationwide injunctions.
It nonetheless permitted the order to go ahead but delayed its ruling from taking effect until late July to allow for new court challenges.
Several lower courts, in issuing their previous injunctions, had ruled that the executive order violated the Constitution. — AFP
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Star
35 minutes ago
- The Star
A guide to fixing the US jobs data problem
President Donald Trump started a firestorm over the reliability of US economic data when he fired the head of the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) following the agency's July non-farm payrolls report. The report wiped 258,000 jobs that were previously counted in May and June, the largest downward revision in decades outside of the Covid pandemic. A miss that big was guaranteed to draw scrutiny. The BLS's jobs and inflation data are arguably the most important numbers the government compiles because the US Federal Reserve (Fed) relies on them to conduct monetary policy. The Fed has long been criticised for reacting too slowly to economic developments, an inevitable consequence of relying on lagging government data. Now the Fed and BLS are likely to face even more pressure to catch up. The timing and reliability of economic data have real world consequences. The Fed held short-term interest rates steady at its July meeting, but it most likely would have lowered them if the BLS had delivered a more accurate payroll count in May and June. The bond market certainly thinks so: The two-year Treasury yield, which reliably anticipates the Fed's interest rate moves, shaved 0.25 percentage points immediately following the jobs report in anticipation of a rate cut. But the problem is much bigger than a single person atop the BLS. Most of the data the agency compiles is based on voluntary surveys. They take a lot of time to collect, and response rates have been declining for years. The response rate of the Job Openings and Labor Turnover Survey (Jolts) was down to just 35% for the March report. BLS said it recognises its data quality issues and is using new tools to gather information, such as video and web-scraping. It's not just BLS. Survey-based data has a lot of people scratching their heads lately. Polls turned out to be less predictive during last year's presidential election than betting platforms such as Polymarket. Consumer sentiment surveys have also been a less reliable barometer of the economy than market-based gauges such as bond yields and stock valuations, which continue to signal a mostly stable economy despite gloomy sentiment. That shouldn't be surprising. Market-based data leverages technology to reach many more participants than antiquated surveys, giving it greater depth, speed and accuracy. I suspect the central bank would agree. The St Louis Fed compared job postings from hiring platform Indeed with job openings in Jolts reports. The overlapping data tracked closely, except that Indeed's data were less volatile and more frequently available. If I were a policymaker relying on jobs data, I know which one I'd prefer. The federal government can do a lot to modernise jobs-related data collection. It can require public companies to report material changes to their headcount, if any, on a weekly basis. Businesses keep track of their number of employees in real time, so it shouldn't be burdensome for them to do, and it would improve the speed and reliability of the jobs data tremendously. Roughly a third of US workers are employed by a public company, about the same percentage as represented in the BLS's jobs survey. The government can further broaden the data set to include employees of privately held businesses by leveraging tax withholding information. Most US workers are employees, which usually means their employer withholds taxes from their paycheck at least twice a month and remits it to the Internal Revenue Service, giving the service a current count of payrolls. It's not a new idea. The Bureau of Economic Analysis contemplated using tax withholding data to estimate wages and salaries nearly two decades ago but ran into obstacles around extrapolating income from withholding. Simply counting payrolls, however, would be much simpler and certainly more comprehensive, reliable and timely than the survey data the BLS currently collects. Payroll processor ADP already does it with its National Employment Report, although it only covers the 25 million workers within its reach, or roughly 20% of the workforce. Monthly changes in ADP's report have been highly correlated with changes in BLS' numbers since 2010. By the way, a robust payroll database would also allow the government to deliver targeted stimulus directly to workers when needed. During the pandemic, workers were meant to receive assistance through the Paycheck Protection Programme, but much of the money was pocketed by business owners, creditors and suppliers instead. Using withholding data to pay workers directly would have been more secure and effective – and can be the next time. If Trump wants government data to be more 'fair and accurate', as he claimed in the wake of the July jobs report, his administration will have to marshal a broader vision than merely replacing the head of a single federal agency. A good start would be for BLS and other government agencies to coordinate efforts to transition from surveys to real-time market data. — Bloomberg Nir Kaissar is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering markets. The views expressed here are the writer's own.
The Star
6 hours ago
- The Star
Factbox-How much territory does Russia control in Ukraine?
LONDON (Reuters) -U.S. President Donald Trump has said that both Kyiv and Moscow will have to cede territory to end the war in Ukraine, so how much territory does Russia control in Ukraine? Russia controls nearly 114,500 square km (44,600 square miles), or 19%, of Ukraine, including Crimea, and a major chunk of territory in the east and south-east of the country, according to open source maps of the battlefield. Ukraine does not control any internationally recognised Russian territory. Russia says Crimea, Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporizhzhia and Kherson - which were recognised by Moscow as part of Ukraine as the Soviet Union collapsed - are now parts of Russia. Ukraine has repeatedly said it will never recognise Russian occupation of its land, and most countries recognise Ukraine's territory within its 1991 borders. Following are details on the territory, Russian claims and Ukraine's position. CRIMEA Russian forces in 2014 took control of Crimea, which juts out into the Black Sea off southern Ukraine, and after a disputed referendum on joining Russia, Moscow absorbed the region into Russia. Its area is about 27,000 square km. Russia says Crimea is legally part of Russia. Ukraine's position is that Crimea is part of Ukraine, though privately some Ukrainian officials admit that it would be very hard to return Crimea to Ukrainian control by force. Crimea was absorbed into the Russian empire by Catherine the Great in the 18th century. Russia's Black Sea naval base at Sevastopol was founded soon afterwards. In 1921, Crimea became part of Russia within the Soviet Union until 1954, when it was handed to Ukraine, also then a Soviet republic, by Communist Party chief Nikita Khrushchev, an ethnic Ukrainian. DONBAS Russia controls about 46,570 square km, or 88%, of the Donbas region of eastern Ukraine, including all of the Luhansk region and 75% of the Donetsk region. About 6,600 square km is still controlled by Ukraine but Russia has been focusing most of its energy along the front in Donetsk, pushing towards the last remaining major cities. Russian-backed separatists in the Donetsk and Luhansk regions broke away from Ukrainian government control in 2014 and proclaimed themselves independent "people's republics". Putin in 2022 recognised them as independent states just days before the invasion of Ukraine. ZAPORIZHZHIA AND KHERSON Russian forces control about 74% of the Zaporizhzhia and Kherson regions of southeastern Ukraine, or about 41,176 square km. Ukraine controls about 14,500 square km across the two regions. Putin in 2024 said that he would be willing to agree peace if Ukraine withdrew from all regions claimed but not fully controlled by Russia - an area currently of about 21,000 square km - and officially renounced its ambitions to join NATO. Reuters reported in 2024 that Putin was open to discussing a Ukraine ceasefire deal with Trump but ruled out making any major territorial concessions and insisted that Kyiv abandon ambitions to join NATO. Two sources said Putin might be willing to withdraw from the relatively small patches of territory it holds in other areas of Ukraine. Putin's conditions for peace include a legally binding pledge that NATO will not expand eastwards, Ukrainian neutrality and limits on its armed forces, protection for Russian speakers who live there, and acceptance of Russia's territorial gains, sources told Reuters earlier this year. KHARKIV, SUMY AND DNIPROPETROVSK Russia also controls small parts of the Kharkiv, Sumy, Mykolaiv and Dnipropetrovsk regions of Ukraine. Across the Sumy and Kharkiv regions, Russia controls about 400 square km of territory. In Dnipropetrovsk, Russia has a tiny area near the border. Russia has said it is carving out a buffer zone in Sumy to protect its Kursk region from Ukrainian attack. LEGAL STATUS OF THE TERRITORIES Russia classes the Republic of Crimea, Sevastopol, the Luhansk People's Republic, the Donetsk People's Republic, and the regions of Zaporizhzhia and Kherson as subjects of the Russian Federation. Ukraine says the territories are part of Ukraine. Most countries do not recognise the areas as part of Russia but some do. Crimea has been recognised by Syria, North Korea and Nicaragua. The United Nations General Assembly declared in 2014 the annexation illegal and recognised Crimea as part of Ukraine. The resolution was opposed by 11 countries. Putin has repeatedly compared the fate of Kosovo and Crimea. He has accused the West of having double standards for recognising Kosovo as an independent country in 2008 against the wishes of Serbia but opposing the recognition of Crimea. Russia opposed the independence of Kosovo. (Reporting by Guy FaulconbridgeEditing by Andrew Osborn and Gareth Jones)
The Star
8 hours ago
- The Star
Militants kill nine Pakistani soldiers in Balochistan: govt officials
Pakistani soldiers in Balochistan. - Photo: Reuters file QUETTA, (Pakistan): At least nine Pakistani soldiers were killed when dozens of militants staged an attack in the country's restive southwestern Balochistan province, government officials said Tuesday (Aug 12). The attack on Monday happened the same day the US State Department listed the Baloch Liberation Army (BLA) as a foreign terrorist organisation after a string of deadly assaults claimed by the group. A senior government official of Washuk district, where the assault took place, said dozens of militants attacked a police station and a border force compound. "The army was attacked by terrorists on their way to respond. The terrorists killed nine soldiers," he told AFP on condition of anonymity as he was not authorised to speak to the media. "There were around 40 to 50 terrorists on motorbikes who attacked government buildings and ransacked them," said a senior official from the province's interior department who asked not to be named, confirming to AFP that nine soldiers were killed. The officials said that six other soldiers were also wounded in the attack. A senior official from the province's interior department said the militants hurled hand grenades at the Frontier Corps compound in Basima city of Washuk district. No group has claimed the attack, but the BLA is the most active in the region. Washington had already listed the BLA under the less severe label of specially designated global terrorists, which targets financial resources, before toughening the ban on Monday. The new step comes as US President Donald Trump increases contact with Pakistan, which was kept at arm's length by his predecessor Joe Biden, whose administration resented Islamabad's role in the two-decade war in Afghanistan. Baloch separatists and rights groups say the military's heavy-handed response to the insurgency has included widespread enforced disappearances and extrajudicial killings. - AFP
