The ruling comes in the wake of a Supreme Court decision limiting judges' authority to issue universal injunctions, allowing a class action lawsuit to challenge the executive order.
**Judge Blocks Trump's Citizenship Order Amid Legal Challenges**
**Judge Blocks Trump's Citizenship Order Amid Legal Challenges**
A New Hampshire judge halts Trump's bid to end birthright citizenship for some residents as legal battles continue.
The ongoing legal battles surrounding President Donald Trump’s executive order aimed at ending birthright citizenship took a significant turn as a New Hampshire judge issued a temporary block on the controversial policy. This order halts the implementation of Trump's directive, which sought to strip citizenship rights from infants born in the U.S. to undocumented immigrants and foreign visitors. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) initiated a class action lawsuit on behalf of affected immigrant parents and their children, prompting the judge's decision.
This judicial ruling surfaced just weeks after the Supreme Court imposed constraints on federal courts' ability to issue universal injunctions. However, it confirmed that such injunctions could still be granted in particular cases. The Trump administration, however, is contesting the judge's ruling, arguing it's an unlawful maneuver that undermines the Supreme Court's directive, which aimed to limit judicial overreach.
Spokesman Harrison Fields emphasized that the administration plans to challenge the ruling vigorously. In his statement, he labeled the decision as an abuse of judicial procedures and asserted that it contravenes the elected policies President Trump was mandated to execute.
The legal underpinning for Trump’s order rests on the U.S. Constitution, which traditionally grants citizenship to anyone born on U.S. soil. Under Trump’s administration, the effort to curtail birthright citizenship emerged as a prominent agenda item. During his presidency, various legal challenges triggered nationwide injunctions that temporarily blocked the implementation of this order, propelling it to the Supreme Court.
Despite a 6-3 vote siding with Trump by the Supreme Court, which limited the powers of federal judges, the justices refrained from determining the constitutionality of the birthright citizenship directive. As the legal process continues, the judge has mandated that the government file an appeal within the next seven days.
This judicial ruling surfaced just weeks after the Supreme Court imposed constraints on federal courts' ability to issue universal injunctions. However, it confirmed that such injunctions could still be granted in particular cases. The Trump administration, however, is contesting the judge's ruling, arguing it's an unlawful maneuver that undermines the Supreme Court's directive, which aimed to limit judicial overreach.
Spokesman Harrison Fields emphasized that the administration plans to challenge the ruling vigorously. In his statement, he labeled the decision as an abuse of judicial procedures and asserted that it contravenes the elected policies President Trump was mandated to execute.
The legal underpinning for Trump’s order rests on the U.S. Constitution, which traditionally grants citizenship to anyone born on U.S. soil. Under Trump’s administration, the effort to curtail birthright citizenship emerged as a prominent agenda item. During his presidency, various legal challenges triggered nationwide injunctions that temporarily blocked the implementation of this order, propelling it to the Supreme Court.
Despite a 6-3 vote siding with Trump by the Supreme Court, which limited the powers of federal judges, the justices refrained from determining the constitutionality of the birthright citizenship directive. As the legal process continues, the judge has mandated that the government file an appeal within the next seven days.
