A US judge issued a ruling Thursday prohibiting President Donald Trump’s executive order ending birthright citizenship from taking effect.<\/b>
\nConcord: A federal judge in New Hampshire issued a ruling Thursday prohibiting President Donald Trump\u2019s executive order ending birthright citizenship from taking effect anywhere in the US.
Judge Joseph LaPlante issued a preliminary injunction blocking Trump\u2019s 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\u2019s 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\u2019 authority to issue nationwide injunctions. The Supreme Court said district judges generally can\u2019t issue nationwide, or universal, injunctions. But it didn\u2019t 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\u2019t make a material difference.
\u201cThis is going to protect every single child around the country from this lawless, unconstitutional and cruel executive order,\u201d said Cody Wofsy, an attorney for the plaintiffs.
The lawsuit was filed on behalf of a pregnant woman, two parents and their infants. It\u2019s among numerous cases challenging Trump\u2019s January order denying citizenship to those born to parents living in the US illegally or temporarily. The plaintiffs are represented by the American Civil Liberties Union and others.
At issue is the Constitution\u2019s 14th Amendment, which states: \u201cAll persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States.\u201d The Trump administration says the phrase \u201csubject to the jurisdiction thereof\u201d means the US can deny citizenship to babies born to women in the country illegally, ending what has been seen as an intrinsic part of US law for more than a century.
\u201cPrior misimpressions of the citizenship clause have created a perverse incentive for illegal immigration that has negatively impacted this country\u2019s sovereignty, national security, and economic stability,\u201d government lawyers wrote in the New Hampshire case.
LaPlante, who had issued a narrow injunction in a similar case, said while he didn\u2019t consider the government\u2019s arguments frivolous, he found them unpersuasive. He said his decision to issue an injunction was \u201cnot a close call\u201d and that deprivation of US citizenship clearly amounted to irreparable harm.
\u201cThat\u2019s irreparable harm, citizenship alone,\u201d said LaPlante. \u201cIt is the greatest privilege that exists in the world.\u201d
White House spokesman Harrison Fields accused LaPlante, who was appointed by Republican President George W. Bush, of \u201cabusing class action procedures.\u201d
\u201cThe 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,\u201d he said in a statement.
During Thursday\u2019s 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 \u201cend-all-and-be-all\u201d 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\u2019s not time to panic, said Ama Frimpong, legal director at nonprofit immigrant rights organization CASA, which is also seeking a nationwide injunction.
\u201cNo one has to move states right this instant,\u201d she said. \u201cThere\u2019s different avenues through which we are all fighting, again, to make sure that this executive order never actually sees the light of day.\u201d
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 US after being targeted by gangs.
\u201cI do not want my child to live in fear and hiding. I do not want my child to be a target for immigration enforcement,\u201d she wrote. \u201cI fear our family could be at risk of separation.\u201d
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 \u2014 his wife\u2019s father is a US citizen.
\u201cMy baby has the right to citizenship and a future in the United States,\u201d he wrote.
Stay updated with our WhatsApp & Telegram by subscribing to our channels. For all the latest World updates, download our app Android and iOS.<\/p>\n