Latest news with #LaPlante
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
8 hours ago
- Politics
- Business Standard
Trump's birthright citizenship order remains blocked amid legal battles
President Donald Trump's plan to end birthright citizenship for the children of people who are in the US illegally will remain blocked as an order from one judge went into effect Friday and another seemed inclined to follow suit. US District Judge Joseph LaPlante in New Hampshire had paused his own decision to allow for the Trump administration to appeal, but with no appeal filed in the last week his order went into effect. The judge's order protects every single child whose citizenship was called into question by this illegal executive order," Cody Wofsy, the ACLU attorney representing children who would be affected by Trump's restrictions, said. The government has not appealed and has not sought emergency relief so this injunction is now in effect everywhere in the country. The Trump administration could still appeal or even ask that LaPlante's order be narrowed but the effort to end birthright citizenship for children of parents who are in the US illegally or temporarily can't take effect for now. The Justice Department didn't immediately return a message seeking comment. Meanwhile, a judge in Boston heard arguments from more than a dozen states who say Trump's birthright citizenship order is blatantly unconstitutional and threatens millions of dollars for essential services. The issue is expected to move quickly back to the nation's highest court. They asked US District Judge Leo Sorokin to consider either keeping in place the nationwide injunction he granted earlier or consider a request from the government either to narrow the scope of that order or stay it altogether. Sorokin, located in Boston, did not immediately rule but seemed inclined to side with the states. Lawyers for the government had argued Sorokin should narrow the reach of his earlier ruling granting a preliminary injunction, arguing it should be tailored to the States' purported financial injuries. LaPlante issued the ruling last week prohibiting Trump's executive order from taking effect nationwide in a new class-action lawsuit, and a Maryland-based judge said this week that she would do the same if an appeals court signed off. The justices ruled last month that lower courts generally can't issue nationwide injunctions, but it didn't rule out other court orders that could have nationwide effects, including in class-action lawsuits and those brought by states. The Supreme Court did not decide whether the underlying citizenship order is constitutional.
Boston Globe
16 hours ago
- Politics
- Boston Globe
Trump's birthright citizenship order remains blocked as lawsuits march on after Supreme Court ruling
Advertisement The Trump administration could still appeal or even ask that LaPlante's order be narrowed but the effort to end birthright citizenship for children of parents who are in the U.S. illegally or temporarily can't take effect for now. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up The Justice Department didn't immediately return a message seeking comment. Meanwhile, a judge in Boston heard arguments from more than a dozen states who say Trump's birthright citizenship order is blatantly unconstitutional and threatens millions of dollars for essential services. The issue is expected to move quickly back to the nation's highest court. They asked US District Judge Leo Sorokin to consider either keeping in place the nationwide injunction he granted earlier or consider a request from the government either to narrow the scope of that order or stay it altogether. Sorokin, located in Boston, did not immediately rule but seemed inclined to side with the states. Advertisement Lawyers for the government had argued Sorokin should narrow the reach of his earlier ruling granting a preliminary injunction, arguing it should be 'tailored to the States' purported financial injuries.' LaPlante issued the ruling last week prohibiting Trump's executive order from taking effect nationwide in a new class-action lawsuit, and a Maryland-based judge said this week that she would do the same if an appeals court signed off. The justices ruled last month that lower courts generally can't issue nationwide injunctions, but it didn't rule out other court orders that could have nationwide effects, including in class-action lawsuits and those brought by states. The Supreme Court did not decide whether the underlying citizenship order is constitutional.
Winnipeg Free Press
16 hours ago
- Politics
- Winnipeg Free Press
Trump's birthright citizenship order remains blocked as lawsuits march on after Supreme Court ruling
BOSTON (AP) — President Donald Trump's plan to end birthright citizenship for the children of people who are in the U.S. illegally will remain blocked as an order from one judge went into effect Friday and another seemed inclined to follow suit. U.S. District Judge Joseph LaPlante in New Hampshire had paused his own decision to allow for the Trump administration to appeal, but with no appeal filed in the last week his order went into effect. 'The judge's order protects every single child whose citizenship was called into question by this illegal executive order,' Cody Wofsy, the ACLU attorney representing children who would be affected by Trump's restrictions, said. 'The government has not appealed and has not sought emergency relief so this injunction is now in effect everywhere in the country.' The Trump administration could still appeal or even ask that LaPlante's order be narrowed but the effort to end birthright citizenship for children of parents who are in the U.S. illegally or temporarily can't take effect for now. The Justice Department didn't immediately return a message seeking comment. Meanwhile, a judge in Boston heard arguments from more than a dozen states who say Trump's birthright citizenship order is blatantly unconstitutional and threatens millions of dollars for essential services. The issue is expected to move quickly back to the nation's highest court. They asked U.S. District Judge Leo Sorokin to consider either keeping in place the nationwide injunction he granted earlier or consider a request from the government either to narrow the scope of that order or stay it altogether. Sorokin, located in Boston, did not immediately rule but seemed inclined to side with the states. Lawyers for the government had argued Sorokin should narrow the reach of his earlier ruling granting a preliminary injunction, arguing it should be 'tailored to the States' purported financial injuries.' LaPlante issued the ruling last week p rohibiting Trump's executive order from taking effect nationwide in a new class-action lawsuit, and a Maryland-based judge said this week that she would do the same if an appeals court signed off. The justices ruled last month that lower courts generally can't issue nationwide injunctions, but it didn't rule out other court orders that could have nationwide effects, including in class-action lawsuits and those brought by states. The Supreme Court did not decide whether the underlying citizenship order is constitutional.
Canada News.Net
6 days ago
- Politics
- Canada News.Net
Federal court upholds birthright citizenship, handing Trump a setback
CONCORD, New Hampshire: A federal judge in New Hampshire issued a crucial ruling on July 10 against President Donald Trump's executive order aimed at terminating birthright citizenship in the United States. Judge Joseph LaPlante granted a preliminary injunction that prevents the order from going into effect nationwide, thereby protecting the rights of many children. This injunction was part of a class action lawsuit that includes all children who would be affected by the executive order, which has sparked significant legal debate since its announcement. The ruling followed an hour-long court hearing and includes a temporary seven-day stay to facilitate an appeal process. The implications of this decision could lead the birthright citizenship matter back to the Supreme Court, where the justices may need to consider whether the executive order aligns with their recent ruling that limited judges' authority to issue nationwide injunctions. While the Supreme Court clarified that district judges generally could not issue universal injunctions, it did leave open the possibility for similar results through a class action. The class action certified in New Hampshire is somewhat narrower than the plaintiffs had hoped for, as they sought to include parents in the legal challenge. However, attorneys involved in the case noted that this distinction would not materially impact the case's overall intent. Cody Wofsy, one of the attorneys representing the plaintiffs, emphasized the ruling's broader implications, asserting it will safeguard all affected children across the nation from what he termed an unconstitutional executive order. A coalition including the American Civil Liberties Union and additional legal partners filed this lawsuit. It represents various plaintiffs, including a pregnant woman and parents with infants. The focus of the legal challenge revolves around the 14th Amendment of the Constitution, which states that all individuals born or naturalized in the U.S. and subject to its jurisdiction are citizens. In its defense, the Trump administration interprets the phrase "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" as permitting the denial of citizenship to children of unauthorized immigrants. While Judge LaPlante noted that he found the government's arguments to be serious, he ultimately deemed them unconvincing. He stated that the threat of losing citizenship constitutes irreparable harm, emphasizing the significant value of citizenship itself. In contrast, a White House spokesman criticized LaPlante's ruling, suggesting it was an abuse of judicial process and pledging that the Trump administration would staunchly defend its immigration policies. Meanwhile, similar legal challenges are underway in various states from Washington to Maryland. Among the plaintiffs is a woman from Honduras, due to give birth soon, who fears for her family's safety due to potential immigration enforcement. Another plaintiff, a Brazilian man, and his wife are navigating their own immigration status as they prepare for their first child. "My baby has the right to citizenship and a future in the United States," he wrote.
Yomiuri Shimbun
11-07-2025
- Politics
- Yomiuri Shimbun
New Hampshire Judge Pauses Trump's Birthright Citizenship Order Nationwide via Class Action Lawsuit
CONCORD, N.H. (AP) — A federal judge in New Hampshire issued a ruling Thursday prohibiting President Donald Trump's executive order ending birthright citizenship from taking effect anywhere in the U.S. Judge Joseph LaPlante issued a preliminary injunction blocking Trump's order and certified a class action lawsuit including all children who will be affected. The order, which followed an hour-long hearing, included a seven-day stay to allow for appeal. The judge's decision puts the birthright citizenship issue on a fast track to return to the Supreme Court. The justices could be asked to rule whether the order complies with their decision last month that limited judges' authority to issue nationwide injunctions. The Supreme Court said district judges generally can't issue nationwide, or universal, injunctions. But it didn't rule out whether judges could accomplish much the same thing by a different legal means, a class action. The class approved in New Hampshire is slightly narrower than that sought by the plaintiffs, who wanted to include parents, but attorneys said that wouldn't make a material difference. 'This is going to protect every single child around the country from this lawless, unconstitutional and cruel executive order,' said Cody Wofsy, an attorney for the plaintiffs. The lawsuit was filed on behalf of a pregnant woman, two parents and their infants. It's among numerous cases challenging Trump's January order denying citizenship to those born to parents living in the U.S. illegally or temporarily. The plaintiffs are represented by the American Civil Liberties Union and others. At issue is the Constitution's 14th Amendment, which states: 'All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States.' The Trump administration says the phrase 'subject to the jurisdiction thereof' means the U.S. can deny citizenship to babies born to women in the country illegally, ending what has been seen as an intrinsic part of U.S. law for more than a century. 'Prior misimpressions of the citizenship clause have created a perverse incentive for illegal immigration that has negatively impacted this country's sovereignty, national security, and economic stability,' government lawyers wrote in the New Hampshire case. LaPlante, who had issued a narrow injunction in a similar case, said while he didn't consider the government's arguments frivolous, he found them unpersuasive. He said his decision to issue an injunction was 'not a close call' and that deprivation of U.S. citizenship clearly amounted to irreparable harm. 'That's irreparable harm, citizenship alone,' said LaPlante. 'It is the greatest privilege that exists in the world.' White House spokesman Harrison Fields accused LaPlante, who was appointed by Republican President George W. Bush, of 'abusing class action procedures.' 'The Trump Administration will be fighting vigorously against the attempts of these rogue district court judges to impede the policies President Trump was elected to implement,' he said in a statement. During Thursday's hearing, Deputy Assistant Attorney General Eric Hamilton argued that both approving a class action and issuing an injunction would be premature, given that no one other than Trump has taken action. He said doing so would mean a single court could become the 'end-all-and-be-all' in reversing new federal policies and said if anything, the injunction should be limited to New Hampshire. Similar cases are pending from Washington to Maryland. It's not time to panic, said Ama Frimpong, legal director at nonprofit immigrant rights organization CASA, which is also seeking a nationwide injunction. 'No one has to move states right this instant,' she said. 'There's different avenues through which we are all fighting, again, to make sure that this executive order never actually sees the light of day.' The New Hampshire plaintiffs, referred to only by pseudonyms, include a woman from Honduras who has a pending asylum application and is due to give birth to her fourth child in October. She told the court the family came to the U.S. after being targeted by gangs. 'I do not want my child to live in fear and hiding. I do not want my child to be a target for immigration enforcement,' she wrote. 'I fear our family could be at risk of separation.' Another plaintiff, a man from Brazil, has lived with his wife in Florida for five years. Their first child was born in March, and they are in the process of applying for lawful permanent status based on family ties — his wife's father is a U.S. citizen. 'My baby has the right to citizenship and a future in the United States,' he wrote.
