logo
US birthright citizenship: Chaos from Trump's executive order is put off

US birthright citizenship: Chaos from Trump's executive order is put off

Scroll.ina day ago
Legal battles over President Donald Trump's executive order to end birthright citizenship continued on July 10 after a New Hampshire federal district judge issued a preliminary injunction that will, if it's not reversed, prevent federal officials from enforcing the order nationally.
The ruling by US District Judge Joseph Laplante, a George W Bush appointee, asserts that this policy of 'highly questionable constitutionality … constitutes irreparable harm'.
In its ruling in late June, the Supreme Court allowed the Trump administration to deny citizenship to infants born to undocumented parents in many parts of the nation where individuals or states had not successfully sued to prevent implementation – including a number of mid-Atlantic, Midwest and Southern states.
Trump's executive order limits US citizenship by birth to those who have at least one parent who is a US citizen or legal permanent resident. It denies citizenship to those born to undocumented people within the US and to the children of those on student, work, tourist and certain other types of visas.
The preliminary injunction is on hold for seven days to allow the Trump administration to appeal.
The June 27 Supreme Court decision on birthright citizenship limited the ability of lower-court judges to issue universal injunctions to block such executive orders nationwide.
Laplante was able to avoid that limit on issuing a nationwide injunction by certifying the case as a class action lawsuit encompassing all children affected by the birthright order, following a pathway suggested by the Supreme Court's ruling.
Beyond universal injunctions
In its recent birthright citizenship ruling, Trump vs CASA, the Supreme Court noted that plaintiffs could still seek broad relief by filing such class action lawsuits that would join together large groups of individuals facing the same injury from the law they were challenging.
And that's what happened.
Litigants filed suit in New Hampshire's district court the same day that the Supreme Court decided CASA. They asked the court to certify a class consisting of infants born on or after February 20, 2025, who would be covered by the order and their parents or prospective parents. The court allowed the suit to proceed as a class action for these infants.
What if this injunction doesn't stick
If the US Court of Appeals for the 1st Circuit or the Supreme Court invalidates the New Hampshire court's newest national injunction and another injunction is not issued in a different venue, the order will then go into effect anywhere it is not currently barred from doing so.
Implementation could begin in as many as 28 states where state attorneys general have not challenged the Trump birthright citizenship policy if no other individuals or groups secure relief.
As political science scholars who study race and immigration policy, we believe that, if implemented piecemeal, Trump's birthright citizenship order would create administrative chaos for states determining the citizenship status of infants born in the United States. And it could lead to the first instances since the 1860s of infants being born in the US being denied citizenship categorically.
State's role in establishing citizenship
Almost all US-born children are issued birth certificates by the state in which they are born.
The federal government's standardised form, the US standard certificate of live birth, collects data on parents' birthplaces and their Social Security numbers, if available, and provides the information states need to issue birth certificates.
But it does not ask questions about their citizenship or immigration status. And no national standard exists for the format for state birth certificates, which traditionally have been the simplest way for people born in the US to establish citizenship.
If Trump's executive order goes into effect, birth certificates issued by local hospitals would be insufficient evidence of eligibility for federal government documents acknowledging citizenship. The order would require new efforts, including identification of parents' citizenship status, before authorizing the issuance of any federal document acknowledging citizenship.
Since states control the process of issuing birth certificates, they will respond differently to implementation efforts. Several states filed a lawsuit on January 21 to block the birthright citizenship order. And they will likely pursue an arsenal of strategies to resist, delay and complicate implementation.
While the Supreme Court has not yet confirmed that these states have standing to challenge the order, successful litigation could bar implementation in up to 18 states and the District of Columbia if injunctions are narrowly framed, or nationally if lawyers can persuade judges that disentangling the effects on a state-by-state basis will be too difficult.
Other states will likely collaborate with the administration to deny citizenship to some infants. Some, like Texas, had earlier attempted to make it particularly hard for undocumented parents to obtain birth certificates for their children.
Potential for chaos
If the Supreme Court rejects attempts to block the executive order nationally again, implementation will be complicated.
That's because it would operate in some places and toward some individuals while being legally blocked in other places and toward others, as Justice Sonia Sotomayor warned in her Trump vs CASA dissent.
Children born to plaintiffs anywhere in the nation who have successfully sued would have access to citizenship, while other children possibly born in the same hospitals – but not among the groups named in the suits – would not.
Babies born in the days before implementation would have substantially different rights than those born the day after. Parents' ethnicity and countries of origin would likely influence which infants are ultimately granted or denied citizenship.
That's because some infants and parents would be more likely to generate scrutiny from hospital employees and officials than others, including Hispanics, women giving birth near the border, and women giving birth in states such as Florida where officials are likely to collaborate enthusiastically with enforcement.
The consequences could be profound.
Some infants would become stateless, having no right to citizenship in another nation. Many people born in the US would be denied government benefits, Social Security numbers and the ability to work legally in the US.
With the constitutionality of the executive order still unresolved, it's unclear when, if ever, some infants born in the US will be the first in the modern era to be denied citizenship.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

No bar on parole, furlough if appeal pending in SC: HC
No bar on parole, furlough if appeal pending in SC: HC

Time of India

timean hour ago

  • Time of India

No bar on parole, furlough if appeal pending in SC: HC

New Delhi: Delhi High Court on Tuesday clarified that prison authorities are empowered to decide pleas for parole and furlough of inmates even if their appeal is pending in the Supreme Court. It answered a reference received from a single judge that emerged from a challenge to the Delhi Prison Rules filed by several former policemen serving jail terms in the notorious Hashimpura massacre case of Uttar Pradesh. "Thus, the Delhi Prison Rules do not bar consideration of parole and furlough if the matter is pending before the Supreme Court. It is an altogether different question as to whether, in the facts of a specific case, the prison authorities ought to grant parole or furlough if the Supreme Court is seized of the matter either in a special leave petition or in an appeal. The grant or non-grant of parole and furlough on merits would depend on the facts of each case," a bench of Justices Prathiba M Singh and Amit Sharma held. The court pointed out that there could be a situation where the apex court may have specifically refused to grant suspension of sentence or refused bail to a particular convict. "The authorities would have to bear in mind the non-grant of suspension or bail by the Supreme Court or other relevant circumstances, and the same may have an impact on the consideration of parole/furlough," it noted. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Secure your family's future! ICICI Pru Life Insurance Plan Get Quote Undo You Can Also Check: Delhi AQI | Weather in Delhi | Bank Holidays in Delhi | Public Holidays in Delhi "In such cases," HC said, "a deeper scrutiny would be required by the prison authorities as to whether parole or furlough could be granted to the convict." The bench emphasised that the mere fact that the authorities could exercise power did not mean parole or furlough ought to be granted as a matter of right, and whether relief could be granted or not was a different issue altogether and depended on the facts of each case. Furlough and parole envisage a short-term temporary release of a convict from jail. While parole is granted to the prisoner to meet a specific exigency, furlough may be granted after a stipulated number of years have been served without any reason. The high court was dealing with a batch of petitions by the convicts whose plea for furlough was not entertained essentially on the ground that their appeals are pending before the Supreme Court. "To impose a bar on consideration of parole/furlough if a special leave petition or appeal is pending in the Supreme Court could have completely unpredictable consequences and could also result in practical difficulties for convicts who may require to be granted parole/furlough due to emergent situations," it highlighted. The court put an end to an earlier interpretation of Rule 1224 of jail that barred parole/furlough being granted if the appeal is pending in the high court. Later, a court ruling extended the bar to also the pendency of appeal before the Supreme Court, which was reversed on Tuesday by the bigger bench. The high court sent each of the petitioners back to the bench that was hearing their plea for parole/furlough, noting that a decision must be made in light of the reference answered by it.

Trump says he will meet Starmer in Scotland visit, expects trade talks
Trump says he will meet Starmer in Scotland visit, expects trade talks

The Hindu

timean hour ago

  • The Hindu

Trump says he will meet Starmer in Scotland visit, expects trade talks

President Donald Trump said on Tuesday (July 15, 2025) he expects to meet with British Prime Minister Keir Starmer in Aberdeen, Scotland, later this month to refine a U.S.-British trade deal. A White House official said Mr. Trump plans to visit his golf properties in Scotland late this month, recreating a trip he made in 2016 during his first run for the presidency. Trump plans to visit both his Turnberry and Aberdeen golf properties on a trip expected to last from July 25-29, the official said, speaking on condition of anonymity. Asked by reporters about the trip, Mr. Trump said he is set to meet Mr. Starmer on the trip. He and Mr. Starmer announced a deal on June 16 on the sidelines of the G7 Summit in Canada that reaffirmed quotas and tariff rates on British automobiles and eliminated tariffs on the U.K. aerospace sector. But the issue of steel and aluminum remains unresolved. "We are going to have a meeting with him, probably in Aberdeen. And we're going to do a lot of different things, also refine the trade deal that we've made," Mr. Trump said. Mr. Trump visited both golf courses during his successful run for a first term in 2016, using the opportunity to praise Britain's "Brexit" vote to part ways with the European Union. As he toured the grounds at Turnberry then, he was accompanied by bagpipers in kilts. The Turnberry course on the west coast of Scotland has been the site of the Open Championship four times, the last one being in 2009. Mr. Trump bought it in 2014. The Republican president will make a state visit to Britain September 17-19 as the guest of King Charles at Windsor Castle. The late Queen Elizabeth had welcomed Mr. Trump to Buckingham Palace for a three-day state visit in June 2019 during his first term in office, during which he had a private lunch with the sovereign and had tea with Charles, who was then heir.

'We're way ahead of China': Trump hails US AI, energy boom at Carnegie Mellon
'We're way ahead of China': Trump hails US AI, energy boom at Carnegie Mellon

India Today

time2 hours ago

  • India Today

'We're way ahead of China': Trump hails US AI, energy boom at Carnegie Mellon

US President Donald Trump on Tuesday declared the dawn of a 'true golden age for America,' as he touted more than $90 billion in energy and technology investments at a high-profile innovation summit in at the Pennsylvania Energy and Innovation Summit at Carnegie Mellon University, Trump struck a triumphant tone while addressing a crowd of business leaders, government officials, and students, saying the US was leading the world in both energy production and artificial are way ahead of China, I have to say,' Trump said during a roundtable discussion, flanked by Cabinet officials and corporate executives. 'China and other countries are racing to catch up to America on AI, and we're not going to let them do it.' The event, hosted by Republican Sen. David McCormick, highlighted Pittsburgh's growing prominence in robotics, AI, and clean energy research. McCormick announced more than $90 billion in public-private investment across Pennsylvania, Much of it focused on job creation, technological development, and energy of the projects, however, were already in the pipeline before the summit, raising questions about how much of the investment was newly secured. 'I think we have a true golden age for America,' Trump said. 'And we've been showing it, and it truly is the hottest country anywhere in the world.'Pennsylvania, a politically important state with deep ties to both coal and natural gas, plays a crucial role in Trump's energy strategy. The Republican administration has taken regulatory steps to boost fossil fuel industries while simultaneously pledging rapid AI development to counter China's rise.'You're going to see some real action here. So get ready,' Trump told the audience, drawing remarks painted a future where AI and traditional energy are not at odds, but complementary tools in strengthening the nation's global standing. He emphasised the administration's commitment to 'friendly' but firm competition with China.'The US will be fighting them in a very friendly fashion,' Trump Trump spoke, his Cabinet members spoke of the need to produce as much energy as possible, especially from coal and natural gas to beat China in the AI race for the sake of economic and national security.'The AI revolution is upon us,' Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick said during an earlier panel discussion." The Trump administration will not let us lose. We need to do clean, beautiful coal. We need to do natural gas, we need to embrace nuclear, we need to embrace it all because we have the power to do it and if we don't do it we're fools.'advertisementSome of the investments on a list released by McCormick's office were not necessarily brand-new, while others were. Some involve massive data centre projects such as a $15 billion project in central Pennsylvania while others involve building power plants, expanding natural gas pipelines, upgrading power plants or improving electricity transmission said it would invest $25 billion on AI and data centre infrastructure over the next two years in PJM's mid-Atlantic electricity grid, while investment firm Brookfield said it had signed contracts to provide more than $3 billion of power to Google's data centres from two hydroelectric dams on the Susquehanna River in Group said it would transform the former Bruce Mansfield coal-fired power plant in western Pennsylvania into a new natural gas-fired plant, and AI cloud computing firm CoreWeave said it will spend more than $6 billion to equip a data centre in south-central plans to spend $25 billion on data centres and building new natural gas-fired power plants in northeastern Pennsylvania, and the company will start construction by the end of 2028, said Jon Gray, its list of participating CEOs includes leaders from global behemoths like Blackstone, Bridgewater, SoftBank, Amazon Web Services, BlackRock and ExxonMobil and local companies such as the Pittsburgh-based Gecko Robotics, which deploys AI to bolster energy capacity.- EndsInputs from Associated Press

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store