A federal judge on Wednesday blocked the Trump administration from enforcing a new executive order aimed at restricting who qualifies for birthright citizenship in the United States. US District Judge Deborah Boardman in Greenbelt, Maryland, issued a preliminary injunction after immigrant rights advocates asked her to halt enforcement of President Donald Trump’s latest order. The groups had previously obtained a ruling from Boardman blocking Trump’s initial 2025 executive order seeking to curtail birthright citizenship.&nbsp;The latest legal battle follows a June 30 decision by the US Supreme Court rejecting Trump’s earlier attempt to end birthright citizenship for children whose parents were neither US citizens nor lawful permanent residents, commonly known as green card holders. The Supreme Court’s 6-3 ruling in Barbara v. Trump centered on the citizenship clause of the 14th Amendment, which grants US citizenship to people born in the country who are ‘subject to the jurisdiction thereof’.&nbsp;Following the Supreme Court’s decision, Trump signed a new executive order on August 6 that specifically targeted so-called 'birth tourism', a practice in which women travel to the United States to give birth so their children can receive automatic citizenship. The order also sought to deny citizenship to certain children if one of their parents works for a foreign government in the United States, engages in fraud or a commercial transaction to obtain citizenship, or is classified as an 'alien enemy'.&nbsp;After Trump issued the new order, attorneys representing babies who could be denied citizenship under the administration’s policies asked Boardman to block its enforcement. They also sought protections ensuring that the citizenship of children covered by their class-action lawsuit would continue to be recognized. Boardman agreed, concluding that the latest order was almost certainly unconstitutional as applied to the certified class.&nbsp;“The latest order is almost certainly unconstitutional as applied to the certified class for the simple reason that the Supreme Court in Barbara already decided that the children in the class ​are citizens at birth.” "The Supreme Court has spoken: Children in the certified class are 'citizens at birth,'" she wrote. The judge’s order prevents federal agencies, including the US Department of State, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and the Social Security Administration, from taking actions that would interfere with, deny or fail to recognize the citizenship of children covered by the class action. The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment.&nbsp;Also Read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/wion-exclusive-hasina-says-she-reads-father-s-unfinished-memoir-while-planning-dhaka-return-1788401203964">WION Exclusive: Hasina says she reads father’s unfinished memoir while planning Dhaka return</a><h2>Administration says lawsuit is premature</h2>The plaintiffs include immigrant rights organizations CASA and the Asylum Seeker Advocacy Project. Last year, the groups persuaded Boardman to join several lower-court judges in blocking Trump’s original birthright citizenship order before the Supreme Court considered the issue. “Immigrant families should not have to come back to court to defend the rights of their U.S.-born children and ​others whose citizenship is being questioned by ​a new executive order," Conchita Cruz, ⁠co-executive director of the Asylum Seeker Advocacy Project, said in a statement.&nbsp;Justice Department attorneys argued that the preliminary injunction was inappropriate because Trump’s latest order is narrower than the sweeping measure challenged in the earlier lawsuit. The administration also argued that the lawsuit was premature because federal agencies had not yet issued the public guidance needed to explain how the new directive would be implemented. That guidance was expected by Saturday, according to the administration.&nbsp;But Boardman determined that immediate court intervention was necessary. Although Justice Department lawyers argued that the order would apply only prospectively, the judge said its language indicated otherwise. "This Court must, once again, preliminarily enjoin enforcement of the President's most recent ⁠attempt to ​strip the right to citizenship from them," she wrote.&nbsp;Boardman’s ruling does not prevent federal agencies from issuing guidance explaining how the administration intended to implement Trump’s order. Reuters reported on Tuesday that the US State Department had drafted proposed guidance that would require parents applying for US passports for their children to provide evidence of their own citizenship or immigration status. The ruling represents another significant legal setback for the Trump administration’s efforts to narrow birthright citizenship and comes after the Supreme Court rejected the president’s earlier attempt to impose broader restrictions.

A federal judge blocks Trump’s new birthright citizenship order, ruling it likely unconstitutional and protecting citizenship rights for affected US-born children

A federal judge on Wednesday blocked the Trump administration from enforcing a new executive order aimed at restricting who qualifies for birthright citizenship in the United States. US District Judge Deborah Boardman in Greenbelt, Maryland, issued a preliminary injunction after immigrant rights advocates asked her to halt enforcement of President Donald Trump’s latest order. The groups had previously obtained a ruling from Boardman blocking Trump’s initial 2025 executive order seeking to curtail birthright citizenship. The latest legal battle follows a June 30 decision by the US Supreme Court rejecting Trump’s earlier attempt to end birthright citizenship for children whose parents were neither US citizens nor lawful permanent residents, commonly known as green card holders. The Supreme Court’s 6-3 ruling in Barbara v. Trump centered on the citizenship clause of the 14th Amendment, which grants US citizenship to people born in the country who are ‘subject to the jurisdiction thereof’. Following the Supreme Court’s decision, Trump signed a new executive order on August 6 that specifically targeted so-called 'birth tourism', a practice in which women travel to the United States to give birth so their children can receive automatic citizenship. The order also sought to deny citizenship to certain children if one of their parents works for a foreign government in the United States, engages in fraud or a commercial transaction to obtain citizenship, or is classified as an 'alien enemy'. After Trump issued the new order, attorneys representing babies who could be denied citizenship under the administration’s policies asked Boardman to block its enforcement. They also sought protections ensuring that the citizenship of children covered by their class-action lawsuit would continue to be recognized. Boardman agreed, concluding that the latest order was almost certainly unconstitutional as applied to the certified class. “The latest order is almost certainly unconstitutional as applied to the certified class for the simple reason that the Supreme Court in Barbara already decided that the children in the class are citizens at birth.” "The Supreme Court has spoken: Children in the certified class are 'citizens at birth,'" she wrote. The judge’s order prevents federal agencies, including the US Department of State, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and the Social Security Administration, from taking actions that would interfere with, deny or fail to recognize the citizenship of children covered by the class action. The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Also Read: WION Exclusive: Hasina says she reads father’s unfinished memoir while planning Dhaka return Administration says lawsuit is premature The plaintiffs include immigrant rights organizations CASA and the Asylum Seeker Advocacy Project. Last year, the groups persuaded Boardman to join several lower-court judges in blocking Trump’s original birthright citizenship order before the Supreme Court considered the issue. “Immigrant families should not have to come back to court to defend the rights of their U.S.-born children and others whose citizenship is being questioned by a new executive order," Conchita Cruz, ⁠co-executive director of the Asylum Seeker Advocacy Project, said in a statement. Justice Department attorneys argued that the preliminary injunction was inappropriate because Trump’s latest order is narrower than the sweeping measure challenged in the earlier lawsuit. The administration also argued that the lawsuit was premature because federal agencies had not yet issued the public guidance needed to explain how the new directive would be implemented. That guidance was expected by Saturday, according to the administration. But Boardman determined that immediate court intervention was necessary. Although Justice Department lawyers argued that the order would apply only prospectively, the judge said its language indicated otherwise. "This Court must, once again, preliminarily enjoin enforcement of the President's most recent ⁠attempt to strip the right to citizenship from them," she wrote. Boardman’s ruling does not prevent federal agencies from issuing guidance explaining how the administration intended to implement Trump’s order. Reuters reported on Tuesday that the US State Department had drafted proposed guidance that would require parents applying for US passports for their children to provide evidence of their own citizenship or immigration status. The ruling represents another significant legal setback for the Trump administration’s efforts to narrow birthright citizenship and comes after the Supreme Court rejected the president’s earlier attempt to impose broader restrictions.

Federal judge blocks Trump’s new birthright citizenship order, ruling it likely unconstitutional for children covered by a class-action lawsuit

US Federal judge blocks Trump administration's new birthright citizenship order

In a bid to combat “birth tourism,” Secretary of State Marco Rubio has announced the creation of a State Department task force. This comes amid US president Donald Trump seeking to end “birthright citizenship,” which gives US citizenship to anyone born on US soil.&nbsp;The US State Department in a statement released on Wednesday said that to "ensure nonimmigrant visas are used only for their lawful and intended purposes, and prevent their exploitation through birth tourism," it is establishing a new "birth tourism", prevention task force.&nbsp;<h2>What is the role of the task force?</h2>&nbsp;<ul><li>It will “review the activities of visa holders worldwide to identify instances of birth tourism, take action to revoke visas of those who engage in or facilitate it, and dismantle the networks that profit from this abuse”</li><li>The task force will analyse and connect information held across the Department and other federal agencies, including the DHS</li><li>Travel histories of individuals from all around the world will be examined</li><li>Notably more than 600 visas from foreign nationals across the globe has been revoked by the task force in past month</li></ul>&nbsp;Rubio in his statement said &nbsp;"Elaborate birth tourism rings are profiting off the exploitation of America's laws- coaching foreigners to defraud the US visa system, arranging travel and housing, and even forging documents, all to enable foreign nationals to obtain citizenship for their children."&nbsp;“The State Department will review the activity of visa holders, dismantle illegal birth tourism networks, and put an end to this heinous abuse of our nation’s laws," he added.&nbsp;The US administration has fought unsuccessfully in courts to end “birth tourism,” a word Trump administration phrase for foreign women coming to the United States with the intention of giving birth to a child on US soil in order to secure their child’s American citizenship.

The task force will “review the activities of visa holders worldwide to identify instances of birth tourism, take action to revoke visas of those who engage in or facilitate it, and dismantle the networks that profit from this abuse”.

In a bid to combat “birth tourism,” Secretary of State Marco Rubio has announced the creation of a State Department task force. This comes amid US president Donald Trump seeking to end “birthright citizenship,” which gives US citizenship to anyone born on US soil. The US State Department in a statement released on Wednesday said that to "ensure nonimmigrant visas are used only for their lawful and intended purposes, and prevent their exploitation through birth tourism," it is establishing a new "birth tourism", prevention task force. What is the role of the task force? It will “review the activities of visa holders worldwide to identify instances of birth tourism, take action to revoke visas of those who engage in or facilitate it, and dismantle the networks that profit from this abuse” The task force will analyse and connect information held across the Department and other federal agencies, including the DHS Travel histories of individuals from all around the world will be examined Notably more than 600 visas from foreign nationals across the globe has been revoked by the task force in past month Rubio in his statement said "Elaborate birth tourism rings are profiting off the exploitation of America's laws- coaching foreigners to defraud the US visa system, arranging travel and housing, and even forging documents, all to enable foreign nationals to obtain citizenship for their children." “The State Department will review the activity of visa holders, dismantle illegal birth tourism networks, and put an end to this heinous abuse of our nation’s laws," he added. The US administration has fought unsuccessfully in courts to end “birth tourism,” a word Trump administration phrase for foreign women coming to the United States with the intention of giving birth to a child on US soil in order to secure their child’s American citizenship.

The task force will “review the activities of visa holders worldwide to identify instances of birth tourism, take action to revoke visas of those who engage in or facilitate it, and dismantle the networks that profit from this abuse”.

Rubio sets up task force to combat ‘birth tourism’, 600 visas revoked

US President Donald Trump on Thursday (May 21) intensified pressure on the Supreme Court, warning it would be a ‘disgrace’ if the justices rule against him on the issue of birthright citizenship. Trump has repeatedly broken political norms by openly criticizing Supreme Court justices and urging loyalty from judges he appointed during his presidency. Speaking at a White House event, Trump pushed the court to support his effort to limit automatic citizenship rights for children born in the United States. “It would be a disgrace if the Supreme Court of the United States allows that to happen,” Trump said while discussing the case.&nbsp;“This decision by the Supreme Court is a very big one. They'll probably rule against me because they seem to like doing that,” Trump added. The Supreme Court has not yet announced when it will deliver its ruling on the matter, which is central to Trump’s broader immigration agenda aimed at tightening border controls and deporting undocumented migrants. Critics argue that the US Constitution clearly guarantees birthright citizenship and say Trump is overstepping presidential authority.&nbsp;Also Read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/how-democrats-lost-2024-elections-dnc-draft-reveals-kamala-harris-failed-to-define-herself-against-joe-biden-and-donald-trump-1779387037195">How Democrats lost 2024 elections: DNC draft reveals Kamala Harris failed to define herself against Joe Biden and Donald Trump</a>&nbsp;Although conservatives dominate the nine-member Supreme Court, the justices have not consistently sided with Trump on key legal challenges. “It's all up to a couple of people, and I hope they do what's right,” Trump said, referring to possible swing votes on the bench. On April 1, Trump attended a Supreme Court hearing related to the birthright citizenship case, becoming the first sitting US president to observe proceedings in person.&nbsp;The legal battle began after Trump signed an executive order following his return to the White House, declaring that children born to parents living in the US illegally or on temporary visas would no longer automatically receive citizenship. Lower courts blocked the order, calling it unconstitutional and citing the Citizenship Clause of the 14th Amendment, which grants citizenship to nearly everyone born on American soil.&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/videos/breaking-rubio-speaks-on-cuba-aid-hormuz-tensions-before-key-nato-meeting-1779382848933/embed">https://www.wionews.com/videos/breaking-rubio-speaks-on-cuba-aid-hormuz-tensions-before-key-nato-meeting-1779382848933/embed</a>&nbsp;Earlier this month, Trump also criticized the Supreme Court after it ruled that his global tariff policy was illegal. He argued that justices should remain ‘loyal to the person that appointed them’. During his first term, Trump appointed three Supreme Court justices, creating a strong conservative majority on the bench.

Donald Trump pressures the Supreme Court over birthright citizenship, warning it would be a 'disgrace' if justices reject his immigration policy

US President Donald Trump on Thursday (May 21) intensified pressure on the Supreme Court, warning it would be a ‘disgrace’ if the justices rule against him on the issue of birthright citizenship. Trump has repeatedly broken political norms by openly criticizing Supreme Court justices and urging loyalty from judges he appointed during his presidency. Speaking at a White House event, Trump pushed the court to support his effort to limit automatic citizenship rights for children born in the United States. “It would be a disgrace if the Supreme Court of the United States allows that to happen,” Trump said while discussing the case. “This decision by the Supreme Court is a very big one. They'll probably rule against me because they seem to like doing that,” Trump added. The Supreme Court has not yet announced when it will deliver its ruling on the matter, which is central to Trump’s broader immigration agenda aimed at tightening border controls and deporting undocumented migrants. Critics argue that the US Constitution clearly guarantees birthright citizenship and say Trump is overstepping presidential authority. Also Read: How Democrats lost 2024 elections: DNC draft reveals Kamala Harris failed to define herself against Joe Biden and Donald Trump Although conservatives dominate the nine-member Supreme Court, the justices have not consistently sided with Trump on key legal challenges. “It's all up to a couple of people, and I hope they do what's right,” Trump said, referring to possible swing votes on the bench. On April 1, Trump attended a Supreme Court hearing related to the birthright citizenship case, becoming the first sitting US president to observe proceedings in person. The legal battle began after Trump signed an executive order following his return to the White House, declaring that children born to parents living in the US illegally or on temporary visas would no longer automatically receive citizenship. Lower courts blocked the order, calling it unconstitutional and citing the Citizenship Clause of the 14th Amendment, which grants citizenship to nearly everyone born on American soil. https://www.wionews.com/videos/breaking-rubio-speaks-on-cuba-aid-hormuz-tensions-before-key-nato-meeting-1779382848933/embed Earlier this month, Trump also criticized the Supreme Court after it ruled that his global tariff policy was illegal. He argued that justices should remain ‘loyal to the person that appointed them’. During his first term, Trump appointed three Supreme Court justices, creating a strong conservative majority on the bench.

Donald Trump pressures the US Supreme Court on birthright citizenship, calling a ruling against him a ‘disgrace’ amid constitutional debate

'It would be a disgrace if SCOTUS allows that to happen': Trump pressures Supreme Court over birthright citizenship debate

The US Supreme Court appeared inclined on Wednesday (April 1) to reject Donald Trump’s unprecedented attempt to end birthright citizenship, following a high-profile hearing attended by the president himself. The case represents a central element of Trump’s broader immigration agenda, and his presence at oral arguments marked a rare moment for a sitting president. Trump left after Solicitor General John Sauer presented the administration’s arguments, and did not stay for American Civil Liberties Union attorney Cecillia Wang, who defended birthright citizenship.&nbsp;"We are the only Country in the World STUPID enough to allow 'Birthright' Citizenship!" Trump said in a social media post after returning to the White House. Trump had signed an executive order at the start of his second term declaring that children born in the U.S. to undocumented immigrants or temporary visa holders would not automatically receive citizenship. Lower courts blocked the order, citing the Citizenship Clause of the 14th Amendment, which guarantees citizenship to nearly all individuals born on US soil.&nbsp;Sauer argued before the court that "unrestricted birthright citizenship contradicts the practice of the overwhelming majority of modern nations" and “demeans the priceless and profound gift of American citizenship.” "It operates as a powerful pull factor for illegal immigration and rewards illegal aliens who not only violate the immigration laws but also jump in front of those who follow the rules," he said.&nbsp;Also Read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/us-lifts-sanctions-on-venezuela-s-interim-leader-delcy-rodriguez-1775089715878">US lifts sanctions on Venezuela’s interim leader Delcy Rodriguez</a>&nbsp;He also raised concerns about "birth tourism," where individuals travel to the US specifically to give birth. However, both liberal and several conservative justices expressed doubts about the administration’s reasoning. Chief Justice John Roberts questioned the relevance of such arguments. "We're in a new world now," the solicitor general said, “where eight billion people are one plane ride away from having a child who's a US citizen.” "Well, it's a new world. It's the same constitution," Roberts replied.&nbsp;The 14th Amendment states that "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States." Roberts noted that the administration appeared to be attempting to broaden exceptions to include undocumented immigrants, calling the approach “quirky.” Justice Brett Kavanaugh questioned the relevance of comparing U.S. law to policies in other countries. "We try to interpret American law with American precedent based on American history," Kavanaugh said. "Why should we be thinking about...other countries? I'm not seeing the relevance as a legal, constitutional interpretive matter."&nbsp;Justice Neil Gorsuch also raised historical concerns, noting that the concept of illegal immigration did not exist when the amendment was adopted in 1868. "If somebody showed up here in 1868 and established domicile, that was perfectly fine," Gorsuch said. “And so why wouldn't we...come to the conclusion that the fact that someone might be illegal is immaterial?” Wang argued that overturning birthright citizenship would jeopardize millions of Americans’ legal status. "Ask any American what our citizenship rule is, and they'll tell you, everyone born here is a citizen alike," Wang said. "That rule was enshrined in the 14th Amendment to put it out of the reach of any government official to destroy."&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/videos/iran-bombards-u-s-targets-as-israeli-airstrikes-rattle-tehran-1775065488091/embed">https://www.wionews.com/videos/iran-bombards-u-s-targets-as-israeli-airstrikes-rattle-tehran-1775065488091/embed</a>&nbsp;The administration contends that the amendment, originally passed after the Civil War to secure rights for formerly enslaved people, does not apply to children of undocumented migrants or temporary residents. Trump’s executive order hinges on the interpretation that such individuals are not "subject to the jurisdiction" of the United States.&nbsp;&nbsp;However, the Supreme Court rejected a similar narrow interpretation in an 1898 case involving a man born in San Francisco to Chinese parents. A ruling against Trump would mark another legal setback, following the court’s decision earlier this year to strike down much of his global tariff policy. A final verdict is expected by late June or early July.

US Supreme Court questions Trump’s push to end birthright citizenship; final verdict likely in July

The US Supreme Court appeared inclined on Wednesday (April 1) to reject Donald Trump’s unprecedented attempt to end birthright citizenship, following a high-profile hearing attended by the president himself. The case represents a central element of Trump’s broader immigration agenda, and his presence at oral arguments marked a rare moment for a sitting president. Trump left after Solicitor General John Sauer presented the administration’s arguments, and did not stay for American Civil Liberties Union attorney Cecillia Wang, who defended birthright citizenship. "We are the only Country in the World STUPID enough to allow 'Birthright' Citizenship!" Trump said in a social media post after returning to the White House. Trump had signed an executive order at the start of his second term declaring that children born in the U.S. to undocumented immigrants or temporary visa holders would not automatically receive citizenship. Lower courts blocked the order, citing the Citizenship Clause of the 14th Amendment, which guarantees citizenship to nearly all individuals born on US soil. Sauer argued before the court that "unrestricted birthright citizenship contradicts the practice of the overwhelming majority of modern nations" and “demeans the priceless and profound gift of American citizenship.” "It operates as a powerful pull factor for illegal immigration and rewards illegal aliens who not only violate the immigration laws but also jump in front of those who follow the rules," he said. Also Read: US lifts sanctions on Venezuela’s interim leader Delcy Rodriguez He also raised concerns about "birth tourism," where individuals travel to the US specifically to give birth. However, both liberal and several conservative justices expressed doubts about the administration’s reasoning. Chief Justice John Roberts questioned the relevance of such arguments. "We're in a new world now," the solicitor general said, “where eight billion people are one plane ride away from having a child who's a US citizen.” "Well, it's a new world. It's the same constitution," Roberts replied. The 14th Amendment states that "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States." Roberts noted that the administration appeared to be attempting to broaden exceptions to include undocumented immigrants, calling the approach “quirky.” Justice Brett Kavanaugh questioned the relevance of comparing U.S. law to policies in other countries. "We try to interpret American law with American precedent based on American history," Kavanaugh said. "Why should we be thinking about...other countries? I'm not seeing the relevance as a legal, constitutional interpretive matter." Justice Neil Gorsuch also raised historical concerns, noting that the concept of illegal immigration did not exist when the amendment was adopted in 1868. "If somebody showed up here in 1868 and established domicile, that was perfectly fine," Gorsuch said. “And so why wouldn't we...come to the conclusion that the fact that someone might be illegal is immaterial?” Wang argued that overturning birthright citizenship would jeopardize millions of Americans’ legal status. "Ask any American what our citizenship rule is, and they'll tell you, everyone born here is a citizen alike," Wang said. "That rule was enshrined in the 14th Amendment to put it out of the reach of any government official to destroy." https://www.wionews.com/videos/iran-bombards-u-s-targets-as-israeli-airstrikes-rattle-tehran-1775065488091/embed The administration contends that the amendment, originally passed after the Civil War to secure rights for formerly enslaved people, does not apply to children of undocumented migrants or temporary residents. Trump’s executive order hinges on the interpretation that such individuals are not "subject to the jurisdiction" of the United States. However, the Supreme Court rejected a similar narrow interpretation in an 1898 case involving a man born in San Francisco to Chinese parents. A ruling against Trump would mark another legal setback, following the court’s decision earlier this year to strike down much of his global tariff policy. A final verdict is expected by late June or early July.

US Supreme Court signals likely rejection of Trump’s bid to end birthright citizenship, with justices questioning constitutional and legal arguments

US President Donald Trump on Thursday (March 13) asked the US Supreme Court to allow his administration's attempt to restrict birthright citizenship.
Trump's executive order barred a child born in the US to have the country's citizenship if not at least one of the parents is a permanent US citizen. It further blocked federal agencies from issuing or recognising documentation that prove US citizenship for children born to unauthorised immigrants and also to those having a temporary immigrant status in America.
Sarah Harris, the justice department&rsquo;s acting solicitor general, filed a petition to the US apex court, asking it to restrict orders by district courts of three states that blocked Trump's executive order on birthright citizenship.&nbsp;
Also read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/iran-says-response-to-trumps-letter-under-assessment-8851849">Iran says response to Trump's letter under 'assessment'</a>
The court filing has called the Trump administration's request &ldquo;modest&rdquo;, asking it to &lsquo;restrict the scope&rsquo; of multiple preliminary injunctions that &lsquo;purport to cover every person in the country,&rsquo; limiting those injunctions to parties actually within the courts&rsquo; power.&nbsp;
&ldquo;Universal injunctions have reached epidemic proportions since the start of the current administration,&rdquo; Sarah said, The Guardian reported.&nbsp;
Also read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/i-think-it-will-happen-trump-reiterates-desire-to-annex-greenland-from-denmark-8851855">'I think it will happen': Trump reiterates desire to annex Greenland from Denmark</a>
She added: "That sharp rise in universal injunctions stops the executive branch from performing its constitutional functions before any courts fully examine the merits of those actions, and threatens to swamp this court&rsquo;s emergency docket."
The court filing comes after Trump signed an executive order on his first day in office on January 20. The order was part of the US president's crackdown on immigration.&nbsp;
Also read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/promising-but-not-complete-trump-reacts-to-putins-remark-on-ukraine-ceasefire-says-will-talk-to-him-8851730">'Promising but not complete': Trump reacts to Putin's remark on Ukraine ceasefire, says 'will talk to him'</a>
The 14th amendment of the US constitution says "all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside&rdquo;.&nbsp;
Also read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/trump-may-soon-invoke-alien-enemies-act-amid-his-push-for-mass-deportations-8851466">Trump may soon invoke Alien Enemies Act amid his push for mass deportations</a>
At least eight lawsuits were filed against Trump's executive order which led to it being blocked nationwide for now.&nbsp;
(With inputs from agencies)

WORLD | Sarah Harris, the justice department’s acting solicitor general, filed a petition to the US Supreme Court asking it to restrict orders by district courts of three states that blocked Trump's executive order on birthright citizenship.

US President Donald Trump on Thursday (March 13) asked the US Supreme Court to allow his administration's attempt to restrict birthright citizenship. Trump's executive order barred a child born in the US to have the country's citizenship if not at least one of the parents is a permanent US citizen. It further blocked federal agencies from issuing or recognising documentation that prove US citizenship for children born to unauthorised immigrants and also to those having a temporary immigrant status in America. Sarah Harris, the justice department’s acting solicitor general, filed a petition to the US apex court, asking it to restrict orders by district courts of three states that blocked Trump's executive order on birthright citizenship. Also read: Iran says response to Trump's letter under 'assessment' The court filing has called the Trump administration's request “modest”, asking it to ‘restrict the scope’ of multiple preliminary injunctions that ‘purport to cover every person in the country,’ limiting those injunctions to parties actually within the courts’ power. “Universal injunctions have reached epidemic proportions since the start of the current administration,” Sarah said, The Guardian reported. Also read: 'I think it will happen': Trump reiterates desire to annex Greenland from Denmark She added: "That sharp rise in universal injunctions stops the executive branch from performing its constitutional functions before any courts fully examine the merits of those actions, and threatens to swamp this court’s emergency docket." The court filing comes after Trump signed an executive order on his first day in office on January 20. The order was part of the US president's crackdown on immigration. Also read: 'Promising but not complete': Trump reacts to Putin's remark on Ukraine ceasefire, says 'will talk to him' The 14th amendment of the US constitution says "all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside”. Also read: Trump may soon invoke Alien Enemies Act amid his push for mass deportations At least eight lawsuits were filed against Trump's executive order which led to it being blocked nationwide for now. (With inputs from agencies)

‘Restrict the scope’: Donald Trump asks SC to allow order against birthright citizenship

US President <a href="https://www.wionews.com/tags/donald-trump" rel="dofollow noopener" target="_blank">Donald Trump</a> has wasted no time in acting on his campaign pledge to enforce a strict crackdown on illegal immigration. However, his efforts have been met with legal resistance, as multiple federal judges have blocked his executive order aimed at ending birthright citizenship.
For nearly 160 years, the 14th Amendment of the US Constitution has granted citizenship to anyone born on American soil. 
But as part of his immigration policies, Trump is pushing to deny citizenship to children of migrants who are in the country illegally or on temporary visas.
Also read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/watch-third-us-deportation-flight-with-112-indians-lands-in-amritsar-amid-outrage-over-alleged-mistreatment-8727110" rel="dofollow noopener" target="_blank">Watch | Third US deportation flight with 112 Indians lands in Amritsar amid outrage over alleged mistreatment</a>
Defending his stance, Trump took to Truth Social on Sunday (Feb 16), saying, "The 14th Amendment Right of American Citizenship never had anything to do with modern-day 'gate crashers,' illegal immigrants who break the Law by being in our Country. It had everything to do with giving Citizenship to former slaves."
He further added, "Our Founding Fathers are 'spinning in their graves' at the idea that our Country can be taken away from us. No Nation in the World has anything like this. Our lawyers and Judges have to be tough and protect America!"
Also read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/russia-ukraine-war-secretary-of-state-marco-rubio-mike-waltz-steve-witkoff-heads-to-saudi-arabia-for-ukraine-peace-talks-with-russia-without-ukraine-8726984" rel="dofollow noopener" target="_blank">'Powerful signal': Trump&rsquo;s team heads to Saudi Arabia for Ukraine peace talks with Russia without Ukraine</a>
Trump argues that automatic citizenship is being exploited by undocumented immigrants crossing the southern border and insists that the long-standing interpretation of the 14th Amendment must change. If enforced, his executive order would overturn more than a century of legal precedent guaranteeing citizenship to nearly all individuals born in the US, regardless of their parents' immigration status.
<h2>Legal setbacks for Trump&rsquo;s orders</h2>
The court rulings against Trump&rsquo;s executive order on birthright citizenship are just one of several legal defeats he has faced in recent weeks.
Also read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/there-can-never-be-nuclear-iran-netanyahu-rubio-discuss-hamas-trumps-gaza-plan-and-tehrans-aggression-8726530" rel="dofollow noopener" target="_blank">&lsquo;There can never be nuclear Iran&rsquo;: Netanyahu, Rubio discuss Hamas, Trump&rsquo;s Gaza plan, and Tehran&rsquo;s &lsquo;aggression&rsquo;</a>
His administration's attempts to freeze federal spending and reduce the government workforce through buyout offers have also been blocked by multiple judges. Several lawsuits have been filed, challenging the president&rsquo;s executive actions.
(With inputs from agencies)

World:  Trump took to Truth Social on Sunday (Feb 16), saying, "The 14th Amendment Right of American Citizenship never had anything to do with modern-day 'gate crashers,' illegal immigrants who break the Law by being in our Country.

US President Donald Trump has wasted no time in acting on his campaign pledge to enforce a strict crackdown on illegal immigration. However, his efforts have been met with legal resistance, as multiple federal judges have blocked his executive order aimed at ending birthright citizenship. For nearly 160 years, the 14th Amendment of the US Constitution has granted citizenship to anyone born on American soil. But as part of his immigration policies, Trump is pushing to deny citizenship to children of migrants who are in the country illegally or on temporary visas. Also read: Watch | Third US deportation flight with 112 Indians lands in Amritsar amid outrage over alleged mistreatment Defending his stance, Trump took to Truth Social on Sunday (Feb 16), saying, "The 14th Amendment Right of American Citizenship never had anything to do with modern-day 'gate crashers,' illegal immigrants who break the Law by being in our Country. It had everything to do with giving Citizenship to former slaves." He further added, "Our Founding Fathers are 'spinning in their graves' at the idea that our Country can be taken away from us. No Nation in the World has anything like this. Our lawyers and Judges have to be tough and protect America!" Also read: 'Powerful signal': Trump’s team heads to Saudi Arabia for Ukraine peace talks with Russia without Ukraine Trump argues that automatic citizenship is being exploited by undocumented immigrants crossing the southern border and insists that the long-standing interpretation of the 14th Amendment must change. If enforced, his executive order would overturn more than a century of legal precedent guaranteeing citizenship to nearly all individuals born in the US, regardless of their parents' immigration status. Legal setbacks for Trump’s orders The court rulings against Trump’s executive order on birthright citizenship are just one of several legal defeats he has faced in recent weeks. Also read: ‘There can never be nuclear Iran’: Netanyahu, Rubio discuss Hamas, Trump’s Gaza plan, and Tehran’s ‘aggression’ His administration's attempts to freeze federal spending and reduce the government workforce through buyout offers have also been blocked by multiple judges. Several lawsuits have been filed, challenging the president’s executive actions. (With inputs from agencies)

‘It was for freed slaves, not immigrants’: Trump defends birthright citizenship order amid legal pushback

US President Donald Trump's executive order aimed to strip birthright citizenship from children of temporary visa holders, sending shockwaves through immigrant communities, particularly Indians in America.&nbsp;
This move has left thousands of expecting Indian parents in a state of uncertainty, despite the policy being temporarily blocked due to legal challenges.
The uncertainty surrounding this policy has left many expecting parents, including Indians, in a difficult position. With the policy's fate hanging in the balance, these families are facing an uncertain future, unsure of their children's citizenship status.
Also read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/mozambique-or-gaza-journalist-fact-checks-doges-50mn-condoms-claim-musk-replies-8713620">Mozambique or Gaza? Journalist fact-checks DOGE's $50mn condoms claim, Musk replies...</a>
<h2 dir="ltr">Indian immigrant parents in limbo</h2>
An Indian couple, Neha Satpute and Akshay Pise, who are engineers on H-1B visas for skilled foreign workers, are expecting their son, due on Feb 26, to be born as American citizens.&nbsp;
Employed at a large tech firm with a supportive parental leave policy, they had carefully built their life in San Jose, California.
"This impacts us directly," says Akshay. "If the order takes effect, we don't know what comes next&mdash;it's uncharted territory." Their biggest question: What nationality will their child have?
Their concern is valid, says New York-based immigration attorney Cyrus Mehta: "US law has no provision for granting non-immigrant status to a person born here."
Also read | <a href="Trump&rsquo;s%20steel,%20aluminium%20tariffs%20draw%20criticism%20from%20Canada,%20Mexico,%20EU">Trump&rsquo;s steel, aluminium tariffs draw criticism from Canada, Mexico, EU</a>
As their baby's arrival draws near, the expecting parents sought medical advice on potentially inducing labour early. Their doctor suggested that, under ideal circumstances, they could consider inducing labour at 40 weeks, but the couple has decided to wait it out.
"I want the natural process to take its course," says Neha. Akshay adds, "My priority is safe delivery and my wife's health. Citizenship comes second."
<h2 dir="ltr">Three federal judges ruled against the policy</h2>
A third federal judge on Monday (Feb 10) blocked President Donald Trump's executive order ending birthright citizenship for the children of temporary visa holders.
The ruling from US District Judge Joseph N. Laplante in New Hampshire comes after two similar rulings by judges in Seattle and Maryland last week. A lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union contends that Trump's order violates the Constitution and "attempts to upend one of the most fundamental American constitutional values."
(With inputs from agencies)

World: Explore the impact of President Trump's executive order on birthright citizenship, stirring concerns among immigrant communities, especially among Indian Americans.

US President Donald Trump's executive order aimed to strip birthright citizenship from children of temporary visa holders, sending shockwaves through immigrant communities, particularly Indians in America. This move has left thousands of expecting Indian parents in a state of uncertainty, despite the policy being temporarily blocked due to legal challenges. The uncertainty surrounding this policy has left many expecting parents, including Indians, in a difficult position. With the policy's fate hanging in the balance, these families are facing an uncertain future, unsure of their children's citizenship status. Also read | Mozambique or Gaza? Journalist fact-checks DOGE's $50mn condoms claim, Musk replies... Indian immigrant parents in limbo An Indian couple, Neha Satpute and Akshay Pise, who are engineers on H-1B visas for skilled foreign workers, are expecting their son, due on Feb 26, to be born as American citizens. Employed at a large tech firm with a supportive parental leave policy, they had carefully built their life in San Jose, California. "This impacts us directly," says Akshay. "If the order takes effect, we don't know what comes next—it's uncharted territory." Their biggest question: What nationality will their child have? Their concern is valid, says New York-based immigration attorney Cyrus Mehta: "US law has no provision for granting non-immigrant status to a person born here." Also read | Trump’s steel, aluminium tariffs draw criticism from Canada, Mexico, EU As their baby's arrival draws near, the expecting parents sought medical advice on potentially inducing labour early. Their doctor suggested that, under ideal circumstances, they could consider inducing labour at 40 weeks, but the couple has decided to wait it out. "I want the natural process to take its course," says Neha. Akshay adds, "My priority is safe delivery and my wife's health. Citizenship comes second." Three federal judges ruled against the policy A third federal judge on Monday (Feb 10) blocked President Donald Trump's executive order ending birthright citizenship for the children of temporary visa holders. The ruling from US District Judge Joseph N. Laplante in New Hampshire comes after two similar rulings by judges in Seattle and Maryland last week. A lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union contends that Trump's order violates the Constitution and "attempts to upend one of the most fundamental American constitutional values." (With inputs from agencies)

Uncertainty grips Indian immigrant community as Trump targets birthright citizenship

A federal judge in Seattle on Thursday (Jan 23) has temporarily blocked the enforcement of an executive order signed by President <a href="https://www.wionews.com/tags/donald-trump" rel="dofollow noopener" target="_blank">Donald Trump</a> on Monday (Jan 20), which aimed to restrict automatic birthright citizenship in the United States. The judge described the order as "blatantly unconstitutional."
US District Judge John Coughenour issued the temporary restraining order after a request from four Democratic-led states&mdash;Washington, Arizona, Illinois, and Oregon. The order prevents the Trump administration from implementing the policy, which was part of the president's broader efforts to address immigration.
Also read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/donald-trump-european-union-trade-policies-davos-summit-wef-8648418" rel="dofollow noopener" target="_blank">Trump slams &lsquo;unfair&rsquo; EU trade policies, vows US will &lsquo;do something about it&rsquo;</a>
<h2>'This is blatantly unconstitutional'</h2>
&ldquo;This is blatantly unconstitutional,&rdquo; Judge Coughenour said during the hearing, addressing a Justice Department lawyer defending the administration's position.
Washington Assistant Attorney General Lane Polozola, representing the four Democratic-led states, argued against the order in court. &ldquo;Under this order, babies being born today don&rsquo;t count as US citizens,&rdquo; Polozola said.
The executive order, signed during Trump&rsquo;s first day in office, has faced backlash. Civil rights organisations and attorneys general from 22 states have filed five lawsuits against the policy, alleging it violates the 14th Amendment of the US Constitution. This amendment guarantees citizenship to anyone born on American soil.
Also read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/us-president-donald-trump-us-china-collaboration-russia-ukraine-war-trump-davos-address-russia-ukraine-war-8648326" rel="dofollow noopener" target="_blank">'They have great deal of power...' President Trump envisions US-China collaboration to end Russia-Ukraine&nbsp;War</a>
<h2>What does Trump's birthright citizenship order mean?</h2>
The policy directs US agencies to deny citizenship to children born in the United States if neither parent is a US citizen or legal permanent resident. According to the order, children born after 19 February to such parents would not be considered citizens. They would also face deportation and be ineligible for Social Security numbers, government benefits, or lawful employment in the future. If implemented, more than 150,000 newborns each year would be denied US citizenship. 
Also read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/donald-trump-border-tom-homan-nationwide-immigration-raids-overturns-biden-era-ban-on-targeting-schools-hospitals-8642092" rel="dofollow noopener" target="_blank">'Enforcing the law like never before,' Trump border czar announces nationwide immigration raids&nbsp;starting&nbsp;today</a>
In a court filing submitted on Wednesday, the Justice Department defended the executive order, describing it as a critical step in addressing the nation&rsquo;s &ldquo;broken immigration system&rdquo; and the &ldquo;crisis at the southern border.&rdquo;
(With inputs from agencies)

World: “This is blatantly unconstitutional,” Judge Coughenour said during the hearing, addressing a Justice Department lawyer defending the administration's position.

A federal judge in Seattle on Thursday (Jan 23) has temporarily blocked the enforcement of an executive order signed by President Donald Trump on Monday (Jan 20), which aimed to restrict automatic birthright citizenship in the United States. The judge described the order as "blatantly unconstitutional." US District Judge John Coughenour issued the temporary restraining order after a request from four Democratic-led states—Washington, Arizona, Illinois, and Oregon. The order prevents the Trump administration from implementing the policy, which was part of the president's broader efforts to address immigration. Also read: Trump slams ‘unfair’ EU trade policies, vows US will ‘do something about it’ 'This is blatantly unconstitutional' “This is blatantly unconstitutional,” Judge Coughenour said during the hearing, addressing a Justice Department lawyer defending the administration's position. Washington Assistant Attorney General Lane Polozola, representing the four Democratic-led states, argued against the order in court. “Under this order, babies being born today don’t count as US citizens,” Polozola said. The executive order, signed during Trump’s first day in office, has faced backlash. Civil rights organisations and attorneys general from 22 states have filed five lawsuits against the policy, alleging it violates the 14th Amendment of the US Constitution. This amendment guarantees citizenship to anyone born on American soil. Also read: 'They have great deal of power...' President Trump envisions US-China collaboration to end Russia-Ukraine War What does Trump's birthright citizenship order mean? The policy directs US agencies to deny citizenship to children born in the United States if neither parent is a US citizen or legal permanent resident. According to the order, children born after 19 February to such parents would not be considered citizens. They would also face deportation and be ineligible for Social Security numbers, government benefits, or lawful employment in the future. If implemented, more than 150,000 newborns each year would be denied US citizenship. Also read: 'Enforcing the law like never before,' Trump border czar announces nationwide immigration raids starting today In a court filing submitted on Wednesday, the Justice Department defended the executive order, describing it as a critical step in addressing the nation’s “broken immigration system” and the “crisis at the southern border.” (With inputs from agencies)

'Blatantly unconstitutional,' Federal judge blocks Trump’s birthright citizenship order

The US President, Donald Trump, issued an executive order to end the practice of automatic birthright citizenship for children of those who are not lawfully present in the nation and those with temporary visas, including students, tourists, and workers. However, atleast 22 states have taken legal action against trump's bid to end birthright citizenship. The 'day one' executive order has started a long legal battle on a century old US Law.&nbsp;
<h2>What is US Birthright citizenship?&nbsp;</h2>
The US Law is based on a legal principle of 'Jus Soli' in Latin, which translates to "right of the soil," and is a centuries-old English practice. Based on this, the 14th amendment to the US Constitution under the 'citizenship clause says, almost everyone born in the United States may become a citizen of the country. Over the years, the law has gone through many changes to include people of colour and other races into the clause - people of colour, Chinese, indigenous peoples, etc...&nbsp;
<h2>Could Trump actually end birthright citizenship?&nbsp;</h2>
It is possible for Trump to end this. However, he would not be able to do it just with an executive order. Some 18 democratic attorneys general sued trump in federal court in Massachusetts, while another coalition of four states filed a similar lawsuit in Seattle.&nbsp;
This marks the first steps in what looks like a long legal battle over trump&rsquo;s immigration policies that will likely end in the US Supreme court. The trump administration is using its executive order to play a long game. This involves getting the supreme court to re-interpret the 14th amendment. The alternative trump could use to override the citizenship clause is by ratifying a further amendment, which would need political backing.&nbsp;
Trump said, &lsquo;we're the only country in the world that does this with birthright, as you know, and it's just absolutely ridiculous.&rsquo; However, citizenship by birthplace is a legal privilege in dozens of nations, including Canada and Mexico.&nbsp;
This policy change is anticipated to affect millions of Indian Americans living in the US. The US Census bureau reports that around 5 million Indian Americans reside in the United States, constituting roughly 1.47 per cent of the population. Among these, just 34 per cent are native-born Americans, while the remaining two-thirds are immigrants.&nbsp;

Business & economy, The 'day one' executive order has started a long legal battle on a century old US Law, The US Law is based on a legal principle of 'Jus Soli' in Latin, which translates to "right of the soil.'

The US President, Donald Trump, issued an executive order to end the practice of automatic birthright citizenship for children of those who are not lawfully present in the nation and those with temporary visas, including students, tourists, and workers. However, atleast 22 states have taken legal action against trump's bid to end birthright citizenship. The 'day one' executive order has started a long legal battle on a century old US Law. What is US Birthright citizenship? The US Law is based on a legal principle of 'Jus Soli' in Latin, which translates to "right of the soil," and is a centuries-old English practice. Based on this, the 14th amendment to the US Constitution under the 'citizenship clause says, almost everyone born in the United States may become a citizen of the country. Over the years, the law has gone through many changes to include people of colour and other races into the clause - people of colour, Chinese, indigenous peoples, etc... Could Trump actually end birthright citizenship? It is possible for Trump to end this. However, he would not be able to do it just with an executive order. Some 18 democratic attorneys general sued trump in federal court in Massachusetts, while another coalition of four states filed a similar lawsuit in Seattle. This marks the first steps in what looks like a long legal battle over trump’s immigration policies that will likely end in the US Supreme court. The trump administration is using its executive order to play a long game. This involves getting the supreme court to re-interpret the 14th amendment. The alternative trump could use to override the citizenship clause is by ratifying a further amendment, which would need political backing. Trump said, ‘we're the only country in the world that does this with birthright, as you know, and it's just absolutely ridiculous.’ However, citizenship by birthplace is a legal privilege in dozens of nations, including Canada and Mexico. This policy change is anticipated to affect millions of Indian Americans living in the US. The US Census bureau reports that around 5 million Indian Americans reside in the United States, constituting roughly 1.47 per cent of the population. Among these, just 34 per cent are native-born Americans, while the remaining two-thirds are immigrants.

22 US states take legal action against Trump over citizenship

President Donald Trump plans to abolish the right to citizenship for anyone born in the United States -- guaranteed by the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution -- with an executive order, he said in an interview excerpt released Tuesday.

While Trump asserts that he can change the provision with such an order, that is far from certain: there is a set process for modifying the constitution, which does not include presidential decree.

His comments come shortly before a hotly-contested midterm election in which the president has sought to place the issue of immigration front and center.

"It was always told to me that you needed a constitutional amendment. Guess what? You don't," Trump said in an interview with Axios. "Now they're saying I can do it just with an executive order."

The president's opposition to the constitutional provision centers specifically on the fact that children born in the US to immigrant parents -- whether they are in the country legally or not -- are automatically citizens.

"We're the only country in the world where a person comes in, has a baby and the person is essentially a citizen of the United States for 85 years with all of those benefits. It's ridiculous. It's ridiculous and it has to end," he said.

Trump said he had spoken to legal counsel about it and that the change is in the works.

"It's in the process, it'll happen -- with an executive order."

President Donald Trump plans to abolish the right to citizenship for anyone born in the United States -- guaranteed by the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution -- with an executive order, he said in an interview excerpt released Tuesday.

President Donald Trump plans to abolish the right to citizenship for anyone born in the United States -- guaranteed by the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution -- with an executive order, he said in an interview excerpt released Tuesday. While Trump asserts that he can change the provision with such an order, that is far from certain: there is a set process for modifying the constitution, which does not include presidential decree. His comments come shortly before a hotly-contested midterm election in which the president has sought to place the issue of immigration front and center. "It was always told to me that you needed a constitutional amendment. Guess what? You don't," Trump said in an interview with Axios. "Now they're saying I can do it just with an executive order." The president's opposition to the constitutional provision centers specifically on the fact that children born in the US to immigrant parents -- whether they are in the country legally or not -- are automatically citizens. "We're the only country in the world where a person comes in, has a baby and the person is essentially a citizen of the United States for 85 years with all of those benefits. It's ridiculous. It's ridiculous and it has to end," he said. Trump said he had spoken to legal counsel about it and that the change is in the works. "It's in the process, it'll happen -- with an executive order."

Donald Trump plans to scrap birthright citizenship: Report