Federal Judge to Consider Class-Action Status in Birthright Citizenship Dispute
CONCORD, N.H. (AP) — The legal debate surrounding President Donald Trump’s executive order on birthright citizenship is set to continue as a federal judge in New Hampshire prepares to hear arguments on Thursday. The case could potentially include all infants affected by the executive order, which restricts citizenship for children born to parents residing in the U.S. illegally or temporarily.
The lawsuit, presented by the American Civil Liberties Union and other groups, represents a pregnant woman, two parents, and their infants. The plaintiffs seek class-action certification and an injunction against the order while legal proceedings unfold. “Tens of thousands of babies and their parents may be exposed to the order’s myriad harms in just weeks and need an injunction now,” state the court documents.
Central to the dispute is the interpretation of the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which grants citizenship to “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof.” The Trump administration argues that this clause allows for the denial of citizenship to children of those unlawfully present in the country, aiming to modify a long-standing aspect of U.S. law.
The government’s legal team argues that previous interpretations of this clause have encouraged illegal immigration, negatively affecting the country’s sovereignty and economic stability. “The Constitution does not harbor a windfall clause granting American citizenship to … the children of those who have circumvented (or outright defied) federal immigration laws,” they contend in court documents.
Ongoing Legal Proceedings Across the U.S.
Nationwide injunctions against the order have been issued by several federal judges, but the U.S. Supreme Court recently limited these injunctions. This has prompted renewed legal efforts by opponents of the order. New Jersey, alongside other states, has requested clarification from a Massachusetts federal court on whether their injunction still stands under the Supreme Court’s decision.
In Washington state, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals seeks written explanations from involved parties on the ruling’s impact. Meanwhile, a Maryland case is also pushing for class-action status, with a decision pending on another nationwide injunction request spearheaded by CASA, a nonprofit advocating for immigrant rights.
Ama Frimpong, CASA’s legal director, has reassured affected individuals, emphasizing, “No one has to move states right this instant,” and highlighting the ongoing legal strategies to block the executive order.
Profiles of New Hampshire Plaintiffs
The New Hampshire case features plaintiffs identified by pseudonyms, including a Honduran woman with an asylum application, expecting her fourth child in October. She cites fears of gang violence in her home country as a reason for seeking refuge in the U.S., stating, “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.”
Another plaintiff, a Brazilian man living in Florida with his wife, is applying for permanent residency. His child, born in March, is at the center of their legal battle. “My baby has the right to citizenship and a future in the United States,” he wrote.
