A federal judge in New Hampshire on Thursday blocked President Donald Trump’s executive order ending birthright citizenship, while granting nationwide class certification to cover all infants affected by the directive. The ruling narrows the class to newborns only, explicitly excluding parents from the legal challenge.
U.S. District Judge Joseph LaPlante said he would issue a full written opinion later in the day, but his initial ruling made clear that denying citizenship based on the immigration status of a child’s parents would create “irreparable harm” and likely violate the 14th Amendment.
The decision marks a major legal setback for the Trump administration, which planned to begin enforcing the order on July 27, citing a 30-day implementation window allowed by the Supreme Court’s recent ruling on the procedural limits of nationwide injunctions.
Trump’s executive order, issued on January 20, his first day back in office, directs U.S. agencies to withhold citizenship documents from babies born in the U.S. unless at least one parent is a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident. The order was immediately challenged by 22 states, civil rights groups, and immigration advocacy organizations, who described the move as unconstitutional and a break with more than a century of legal precedent.
BREAKING: Federal judge issues a “NATIONWIDE BLOCK” against President Trump’s Birthright Citizenship Executive Order. pic.twitter.com/WmaAYlYfKf
— Townhall.com (@townhallcom) July 10, 2025
The policy was initially blocked by multiple lower courts and escalated to the Supreme Court, which ruled 6–3 in June that universal injunctions — court orders blocking enforcement of a federal law or policy nationwide — must be grounded in properly certified class-action lawsuits. That ruling did not address whether Trump’s executive order itself is constitutional, leaving the core legal question unresolved.
The Supreme Court’s decision set the stage for a wave of new lawsuits, including the successful class-action certification in LaPlante’s court. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and other groups have filed similar actions in Maryland and other states.
In court, Department of Justice lawyers emphasized that while the Supreme Court barred universal injunctions without class certification, it did not block the administration from preparing for enforcement. They confirmed the White House intends to publish guidance and move forward with the order immediately after the stay expires.
The broader legal landscape remains unsettled. The Supreme Court’s opinion, authored by Justice Amy Coney Barrett, significantly limits lower courts’ power to issue universal relief. Barrett stressed that such injunctions lack historical precedent and often overstep judicial authority. However, she left the door open for further class-action litigation to challenge unconstitutional policies on a broader scale.
BREAKING: Federal judge blocks Trump’s birthright citizenship order despite U.S. Supreme Court ruling
— ALX (@alx) July 10, 2025
Justice Sonia Sotomayor, dissenting, accused the majority of undercutting the judiciary’s ability to check unlawful executive action, writing that the court’s refusal to allow broad injunctions “kneecaps” federal judges. She warned the ruling could result in newborns being denied citizenship unless families have the means to pursue individual lawsuits or succeed in deportation-related challenges.
Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, in a separate dissent, warned that the majority’s emphasis on 18th- and 19th-century legal tradition ignored the modern stakes. She called the ruling “an existential threat to the rule of law” and accused the majority of giving the Executive Branch room to violate constitutional protections with impunity.
Despite those dissents, the Supreme Court’s decision effectively shifted the burden to lower courts to certify classes before issuing broad injunctions — a higher bar that will slow challenges but not stop them.
