President Donald Trump‘s quest to end birthright citizenship took a blow on Thursday, nearly two weeks since his resounding Supreme Court victory on the same issue.
It’s the latest step in an ongoing battle between Trump and various judges in states far over his plan to deny citizenship to U.S.-born children of illegal migrants.
A federal judge in New Hampshire blocked Trump’s plan by certifying a class action lawsuit on the matter filed on behalf of all future children who would be affected by the order.
After the recent Supreme Court ruling that blocked federal judges from stopping Trump though ‘nationwide injunctions,’ a class-action lawsuit was deemed the only option to stop the president.
The high court had allowed Trump’s executive order halting birthright citizenship to take effect handing him a major victory.
The court ruled 6-3 in favor of Trump, with all six conservative justices – including the three he appointed – siding with the president.
Speaking at the White House, Trump reacted at the time: ‘This was a big one. Amazing decision, one we’re very happy about. This really brings back the Constitution. This is what it’s all about.’
President Donald Trump’s quest to end birthright citizenship took a blow
Trump has long complained about individual judges in liberal states being able to issue orders against his policies that apply across the country.
Judge Joseph LaPlante, a George W. Bush appointee, said his order issued Thursday would include a seven-day stay to allow for appeal. It also ensures a new round of litigation and appeals.
The class action suit is narrower than the plaintiffs originally sought. They had wanted to include parents in the matter.
The lawsuit was filed on behalf of a pregnant woman, two parents and their infants.
It’s one of many cases challenging Trump’s January order that denies citizenship to those born to parents living in the U.S. illegally or temporarily.
The plaintiffs are represented by the American Civil Liberties Union and others.
At issue is the Constitution’s 14th Amendment, which states: ‘All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States.’
The Trump administration argues the phrase ‘subject to the jurisdiction thereof’ means the U.S. can deny citizenship to babies born to women in the country illegally, which ends a long-held tenet of American life.
Several federal judges had issued nationwide injunctions stopping Trump’s order from taking effect, but the Supreme Court limited those injunctions in a June 27 ruling that gave lower courts 30 days to act. With that time frame in mind, opponents of the change quickly returned to court to try to block it.
The Supreme Court ruling also did not address the core dispute surrounding the constitutionality of Trump’s executive action, but it paved the way for a majority of states to begin enforcing it.
Cases are making their way through other states.
In a Washington state case before the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, the judges have asked the parties to write briefs explaining the effect of the Supreme Court´s ruling. Washington and the other states in that lawsuit have asked the appeals court to return the case to the lower court judge.
As in New Hampshire, a plaintiff in Maryland seeks to organize a class-action lawsuit that includes every person who would be affected by the order. The judge set a Wednesday deadline for written legal arguments as she considers the request for another nationwide injunction from CASA, a nonprofit immigrant rights organization.
Mairelise Robinson, a U.S. citizen who is 6 months pregnant, attends a protest in support of birthright citizenship, outside of the Supreme Court in May
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 U.S. after being targeted by gangs.
‘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,’ she wrote. ‘I fear our family could be at risk of separation.’
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 – his wife’s father is a U.S. citizen.
‘My baby has the right to citizenship and a future in the United States,’ he wrote.
This article was originally published by a www.dailymail.co.uk . Read the Original article here. .