A federal judge in New Hampshire has issued a nationwide block on US President Donald Trump’s controversial executive order seeking to end birthright citizenship, dealing a significant blow to the policy.
US District Judge Joseph Laplante, ruling from the bench on Thursday, granted a request from immigration rights lawyers to certify a nationwide class comprising children, both born and unborn, who would be stripped of their citizenship under Trump’s order. He simultaneously issued a preliminary injunction, indefinitely halting enforcement of the policy.
“This preliminary injunction is not a close call,” Laplante said during the hearing. “The deprivation of US citizenship and an abrupt change of longstanding policy, that’s irreparable harm. US citizenship is the greatest privilege that exists in the world.”
The judge, a George W. Bush appointee, paused his ruling for several days to give the Trump administration time to file an appeal. His decision is being closely watched, as it may serve as a crucial bulwark against Trump’s effort to upend a constitutional principle dating back over a century.
The Supreme Court recently limited the ability of lower court judges to issue nationwide injunctions, but left the door open for broader legal protections via class action suits, something Laplante directly acknowledged. “I’m the judge who wasn’t comfortable with issuing a nationwide injunction. Class action is different,” he said. “The Supreme Court suggested class action is a better option.”
The case, brought forward by attorneys with the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), argues that Trump’s order contradicts the text of the Fourteenth Amendment and long-standing legal precedent affirming birthright citizenship for nearly all children born on US soil.
Thursday’s ruling is not Laplante’s first involvement with the matter. In February, he blocked enforcement of the executive order against members of several non-profit groups. However, that injunction was limited in scope. This latest decision significantly broadens the protection to all children at risk.
The newly certified class does not include parents of affected children, a detail the judge addressed. He expressed concern that including adults with varying immigration circumstances could complicate class certification under federal legal rules. Justice Department lawyer Eric Hamilton had requested time for discovery to assess the legal statuses of the parents involved, but Laplante denied the request, citing urgency.
“You’re right, ordinarily we’d conduct discovery before granting class certification,” Laplante said. “There’s no time for discovery.”
The class representatives in the lawsuit include a Honduran asylum-seeker, referred to as “Barbara”, who is currently pregnant and living in New Hampshire, and a Brazilian man, “Mark”, whose wife,undocumented, gave birth in the US earlier this year.
According to court filings, if Trump’s order were allowed to stand, children like those of Barbara and Mark would face “numerous obstacles to life in the United States, including stigma and potential statelessness; loss of their right to vote, serve on federal juries and in elected office, and access certain federal jobs; ineligibility for various government programmes; and potential arrest, detention, and deportation to countries they may never have known.”
“No court in the country has agreed with the administration on the underlying constitutional question,” said ACLU attorney Cody Wofsy, who helped bring the cases. “Every court has said this order is unconstitutional, and so we expect to prevail.”
Wofsy emphasised that the hearing’s key issue was procedural: “How are we going to ensure that every single child is protected?”
As legal proceedings continue, Laplante’s ruling provides a temporary but crucial safeguard for potentially thousands of children and underscores the enduring constitutional battle over one of the bedrocks of American identity.
