• A third federal court has blocked President Trump’s executive order ending birthright citizenship for children of non-citizen parents. The ruling, issued despite a recent Supreme Court decision limiting nationwide injunctions, highlights continued judicial resistance and legal uncertainty around the president’s immigration authority.

BOSTON, MA (TDR) — A third federal court has ruled against President Donald Trump’s birthright citizenship executive order, siding with more than a dozen states that argue the policy violates the Constitution. The decision was handed down Friday by U.S. District Judge Leo Sorokin, an Obama appointee, who found that a nationwide injunction remains appropriate — even under the Supreme Court’s recent limitations on such remedies.

“No workable, narrower alternative would provide the plaintiffs full relief,” Sorokin wrote in his 23-page opinion, referencing the high court’s June decision in Garland v. CASA de Maryland.

The order at the center of the case would deny citizenship to U.S.-born children whose parents lack permanent legal status, effectively reversing more than a century of settled immigration law under the 14th Amendment.

Freedom-Loving Beachwear by Red Beach Nation - Save 10% With Code RVM10

Nationwide Injunctions Still on the Table

Although the Supreme Court ruled 6–3 last month to limit nationwide injunctions, it left open exceptions — including instances where states require such relief to avoid irreparable harm. Sorokin invoked that exception, citing the broad impact the order would have on states’ health systems, schools, and legal systems.

“The record does not support a finding that any narrower option would feasibly and adequately protect the plaintiffs,” Sorokin wrote.

This ruling follows two other federal decisions — including one in New Hampshire, where Judge Joseph LaPlante granted a class-action injunction blocking the order nationwide. Though he briefly paused his ruling to allow an appeal, the administration did not act, allowing the block to stand.

Mixed Legal Momentum and Political Stakes

While other Trump initiatives have moved swiftly through the appellate process, the administration has taken a slower approach in this particular case. Legal observers say it signals caution as the White House weighs Supreme Court review.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE THE DUPREE REPORT

“This illegal action cannot take effect anywhere without harming New Jersey and the other States,” said New Jersey Attorney General Matt Platkin, who led one of the suits.

“American-born babies are American, just as they have been at every other time in our Nation’s history,” he added.

Trump’s order, announced in May, was part of a broader second-term push to reshape immigration law via executive authority. While supporters say the move protects national sovereignty and curbs abuse of the citizenship clause, critics argue it oversteps the Constitution.

With three lower courts now united in their opposition, the issue appears destined for a return trip to the Supreme Court, where the limits of executive immigration authority will likely be tested again.

Can an executive order rewrite constitutional citizenship—or will the courts preserve what Trump’s critics call a birthright guarantee?

Follow The Dupree Report on YouTube

Freedom-Loving Beachwear by Red Beach Nation - Save 10% With Code RVM10