Judge Blocks Attempt to Restrict Citizenship
On Wednesday, a federal judge halted the Trump administration’s efforts to limit birthright citizenship. The administration aimed to deny citizenship to certain children born in the U.S., counter to a Supreme Court decision affirming their citizenship. U.S. District Judge Deborah Boardman, appointed by President Joe Biden, made this ruling.
Judge Boardman criticized the executive order for conflicting with a Supreme Court ruling. The ruling states children born in the U.S. to unlawfully or temporarily present parents are protected by the Fourteenth Amendment. “The Supreme Court has spoken: Children in the certified class are ‘citizens at birth,'” Boardman wrote.
“Barbara is the law of the land. The President must follow it.”
The court issued a preliminary injunction against key parts of the order. Federal agencies like the State Department, Department of Homeland Security, and Social Security Administration can’t enforce the policy for children covered by the lawsuit during ongoing litigation.
Juana, a member of We Are CASA and class representative, expressed gratitude. “Today’s decision gives me relief because my child and thousands of other children remain protected,” she said.
Trump’s Efforts Against Birthright Citizenship
This decision adds to the ongoing legal debate over Trump’s attempts to limit birthright citizenship through executive action. Trump argued that birthright citizenship encouraged illegal immigration. Plans to end it through executive actions met with legal challenges but were never implemented during his first term.
Upon returning to office in January 2025, Trump issued a new executive order aimed at denying citizenship to many U.S.-born children of parents without legal status. The policy triggered numerous lawsuits, including the current Maryland case.
The administration claimed the order targeted specific groups, but Boardman found the policy unconstitutional when applied to the children in question. The Supreme Court’s decision in Trump v. Barbara established these children’s citizenship, leaving the administration little room to alter this through executive orders.
The injunction doesn’t nullify the entire order nationwide but maintains the children’s current citizenship status while legal proceedings continue.
Supreme Court’s Role
The ruling relies on the Supreme Court decision in Trump v. Barbara. In July, the court considered Trump’s executive order that aimed to deny citizenship to children born in the U.S. The decision affirmed these children are “citizens at birth” under the Fourteenth Amendment.
The Supreme Court concluded that these children don’t fall within historical exceptions to birthright citizenship. This resolution was central to the Maryland lawsuit. Boardman emphasized that no executive order can override the Supreme Court’s decision.
The Fourteenth Amendment
The debate centers on the Fourteenth Amendment, established in 1868. It states that “all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens.”
Boardman’s opinion reviews the extensive precedent covering this language. The decision cites the common-law principle of jus soli and reinforces it based on landmark cases like United States v. Wong Kim Ark, confirming citizenship for most U.S.-born children irrespective of their parents’ immigration status.
Future Implications
The injunction preserves the citizenship status for those in the lawsuit while litigation continues. It restricts federal agencies from implementing the new order against these individuals. Yet, the administration can still develop guidance and other portions of the order not affecting the class.
The Justice Department plans to appeal, potentially leading to another Supreme Court showdown. The judge’s stance was clear: The president and lower courts must abide by the Supreme Court’s ruling.