Federal judge blocks Trump birthright decree

U.S. District Judge Deborah Boardman on Sept. 2 blocked the Trump administration from enforcing President Donald Trump’s latest executive order limiting birthright citizenship for some children born in the United States. The order had been signed on Aug. 6, after the Supreme Court rejected Trump’s earlier, broader effort on June 30. Boardman said the new order could not be applied to children already covered by an existing class action because the Supreme Court had already held that they are citizens at birth. Her preliminary injunction bars the State Department, the Department of Homeland Security and the Social Security Administration from refusing to recognize citizenship for people in that class. ### What exactly did Judge Deborah Boardman block? Deborah Boardman, a federal judge in Greenbelt, Maryland, issued a preliminary injunction against Trump’s Aug. 6 order at the request of immigrant-rights advocates who had challenged the administration’s earlier 2025 birthright citizenship order. The ruling does not erase the executive order itself, but it stops federal agencies from enforcing it against the certified class in that lawsuit. (usnews.com) Boardman wrote that the latest order was “almost certainly unconstitutional as applied to the certified class” because the Supreme Court had already decided in *Barbara v. Trump* that those children are citizens at birth. She said the court had to “once again” block the administration’s attempt to strip citizenship from them. ### What was in Trump’s August 6 decree? (usnews.com) The White House said on Aug. 6 that Trump signed two executive orders: one identifying categories of children of noncitizens whom the administration said were not entitled to birthright citizenship, and a second directing the State Department and DHS to halt “birth tourism.” The administration described the move as an effort to protect “the meaning and value of American citizenship” after the Supreme Court’s June ruling. (usnews.com) The new birthright order was narrower than Trump’s earlier effort. It targeted, among others, children born to parents with ties to foreign governments or organizations, children whose parents were deemed to have engaged in fraud to obtain citizenship, and people classified as an “alien enemy,” according to accounts of the order and the White House fact sheet. A separate order sought tighter visa restrictions on people traveling to the United States to give birth. (whitehouse.gov) ### Why was Trump trying a narrower order after losing at the Supreme Court? The Supreme Court ruled on June 30 in *Trump v. Barbara* that the Constitution’s 14th Amendment protects citizenship for children born in the United States whose parents are not American citizens or lawful permanent residents, according to Reuters’ account of the decision. The White House said afterward that the court had still recognized historical exceptions and that the administration was acting within those limits. (whitehouse.gov) Trump said on Aug. 6 that he believed the revised actions would survive constitutional review. The written order and the White House fact sheet framed the policy as a response to “birth tourism” and to what the administration called fraudulent efforts to obtain citizenship through temporary entry into the country. ### Why didn’t the court stop it sooner? (usnews.com) Boardman declined on Aug. 28 to issue an immediate temporary restraining order because the plaintiffs’ existing complaint had not yet been updated to challenge the 2026 order. She allowed the challengers to supplement their complaint and set an expedited briefing schedule, according to a SCOTUSblog summary of Reuters’ reporting. (whitehouse.gov) That procedural step explains why the administration’s new order was not blocked the day it was issued. The injunction came after the plaintiffs formally folded the Aug. 6 order into the existing case and returned to court. ### What happens next in the case? The Sept. 2 injunction is preliminary, which means the underlying lawsuit continues even though enforcement is paused for the covered class. (scotusblog.com) The Trump administration can ask the U.S. Court of Appeals to review Boardman’s ruling while the case proceeds in federal court. The immediate practical effect is narrower and more concrete: federal agencies named in Boardman’s order cannot interfere with, deny or fail to recognize citizenship for people covered by the class action while the litigation moves forward. (scotusblog.com) Any next step is likely to come through an appeal or further district-court proceedings in Maryland. (usnews.com)