For the second time in less than a year, a federal court has stood between an executive order and the constitutional guarantee of birthright citizenship — a principle the United States has upheld for over a century. Judge Deborah Boardman in Maryland found Trump's August executive order targeting 'birth tourism' unconstitutional on the same grounds the Supreme Court had already articulated in June: the Fourteenth Amendment grants citizenship to those born on American soil, and no presidential order may undo that. The episode reveals a recurring tension in American governance — between the exec
Federal Judge Blocks Trump's Second Birthright Citizenship Executive Order
The Supreme Court has spoken: Children are citizens at birth.
Mark
So the judge blocked it the same day it was challenged, or did this take time?
Mimi
No, Boardman had already been working on this. The plaintiffs filed their revised complaint last week, and she issued the injunction on Wednesday. She was ready.
Luke
But let's be precise: this is a preliminary injunction, not a final ruling. It stops enforcement while the case proceeds. That's important.
Mark
Why would Trump issue a second order if the Supreme Court had already said no?
Mimi
Because the first order was very broad, and Trump's team thought they could write a narrower one that might survive. This one targeted specific categories—birth tourism, commercial transactions, "alien enemies."
Luke
Right, but the judge said it fails for the same reason the first one did. The Supreme Court already decided the children in question are citizens at birth. You can't narrow your way around that.
Mark
Is there any legal argument left for Trump here?
Mimi
Not really at the federal level, not after a 6-3 Supreme Court decision. He could appeal Boardman's injunction, but he'd be appealing to the same Supreme Court that just ruled against him.
Luke
Though we should note: the fact that he's trying again suggests either his legal team believes there's an angle, or this is more about politics and messaging than law.
Mark
What happens next?
Mimi
The case continues in Boardman's court. But unless the Supreme Court changes its mind or the Constitution is amended, birthright citizenship is protected.
Luke
And that's the real story—not that he lost again, but that he's continuing to push despite a clear constitutional barrier.
Il Polso
- Just three months after the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that birthright citizenship is constitutionally protected, the Trump administration signed a second executive order attempting to deny citizenship to children of certain foreign nationals — a move legal observers immediately flagged as constitutionally untenable.
- Judge Boardman moved swiftly, issuing a preliminary injunction and writing that the new order was 'almost certainly unconstitutional' for the same reason the first one failed — the Supreme Court had already answered the question.
- Immigrant rights groups and affected families, including the Asylum Seeker Advocacy Project, brought the challenge, forcing courts to once again defend a constitutional protection that has stood since 1898.
- The ruling leaves the administration facing the same legal wall it encountered before, with no clear executive pathway around a Fourteenth Amendment the Court has interpreted consistently for over a century.
- Yet the White House's willingness to issue a second order signals that these legal defeats are not deterrents — the constitutional battle over who belongs in America is being waged as a long game.
For the second time in less than a year, a federal court has stood between an executive order and the constitutional guarantee of birthright citizenship — a principle the United States has upheld for over a century. Judge Deborah Boardman in Maryland found Trump's August executive order targeting 'birth tourism' unconstitutional on the same grounds the Supreme Court had already articulated in June: the Fourteenth Amendment grants citizenship to those born on American soil, and no presidential order may undo that. The episode reveals a recurring tension in American governance — between the executive's appetite for policy transformation and the judiciary's role as keeper of constitutional memory. That the administration issued a second order after a 6-3 Supreme Court ruling suggests this is less a legal miscalculation than a deliberate, ongoing contest over the meaning of belonging in America.
A federal judge in Maryland has blocked President Trump's second attempt to curtail birthright citizenship, issuing a preliminary injunction against an executive order signed on August 6 that targeted so-called 'birth tourism' and sought to deny citizenship to children of certain foreign nationals — including those accused of commercial transactions to obtain citizenship or classified as 'alien enemies.'
Judge Deborah Boardman's ruling was direct: the new order was unconstitutional for the same reason the Supreme Court had already struck down Trump's first attempt. In June, the Court ruled 6-3 in Barbara v Trump that the Fourteenth Amendment protects birthright citizenship. Boardman wrote that the children affected 'are citizens at birth' and that she must 'once again' block the administration's effort to strip that right from them.
Birthright citizenship has been a settled constitutional principle for well over a century, anchored in the Fourteenth Amendment and affirmed in the 1898 Supreme Court case US v Wong Kim Ark. Trump and his allies have argued that children of temporary or undocumented immigrants fall outside constitutional protection because their parents are not under full US jurisdiction — an interpretation the Supreme Court explicitly rejected in June.
Boardman had previously blocked Trump's first birthright order and had already signaled deep skepticism about the second, calling it 'unprecedented' even before issuing her ruling. The lawsuit was brought by immigrant rights advocates and affected families. Her Wednesday decision leaves the administration facing the same constitutional barrier as before — and the White House's decision to issue a second order despite the Court's clear ruling suggests this fight over the meaning of American citizenship is far from finished.
A federal judge in Maryland has blocked President Trump's second attempt to restrict birthright citizenship, just three months after the Supreme Court rejected his first effort on constitutional grounds.
District Judge Deborah Boardman issued a preliminary injunction on Wednesday against an executive order Trump signed on August 6. That order targeted what the administration calls "birth tourism"—the practice of traveling to the United States specifically to give birth—and sought to deny citizenship to children born to foreign nationals in certain categories, including those accused of engaging in commercial transactions to obtain citizenship or classified as "alien enemies."
Boardman's decision was swift and direct. She found the new order unconstitutional for the identical reason the Supreme Court had already rejected Trump's first attempt. In June, the Court ruled 6-3 in the case Barbara v Trump that birthright citizenship is protected under the Fourteenth Amendment. Boardman wrote that the order "is almost certainly unconstitutional as applied to the certified class for the simple reason that the Supreme Court in Barbara already decided that the children in the class are citizens at birth." She added: "This Court must, once again, preliminarily enjoin enforcement of the President's most recent attempt to strip the right to citizenship from them."
Birthright citizenship has deep constitutional roots. The Fourteenth Amendment grants automatic citizenship to anyone born in the United States, with only narrow exceptions—children of diplomats and invading armies among them. The Supreme Court has upheld this principle across multiple cases over more than a century, including the landmark 1898 decision US v Wong Kim Ark, which affirmed citizenship rights for a man born in America to Chinese immigrant parents.
Trump made restricting birthright citizenship a centerpiece of his 2024 campaign. He and his allies have argued that children of temporary or undocumented immigrants fall outside the constitutional protection because their parents are not under the "jurisdiction" of the United States—an interpretation the Supreme Court rejected in its June decision. Despite that defeat, Trump and his administration have continued searching for legal pathways to challenge the constitutional protections.
The lawsuit was brought by immigrant rights advocates and families, including the Asylum Seeker Advocacy Project. Boardman had previously blocked Trump's first executive order on birthright citizenship last year. Last week, she asked the plaintiffs to revise their complaint to address the second order specifically rather than relying on arguments from the first challenge. Even then, she signaled skepticism about the new order's constitutionality, calling it "unprecedented."
In her Wednesday decision, Boardman was unambiguous: "The Supreme Court has spoken: Children in the certified class are 'citizens at birth.'" The ruling leaves Trump facing the same constitutional barrier he encountered before—and suggests that any further attempts to restrict birthright citizenship through executive action will face similar legal obstacles. Yet the administration's willingness to issue a second order after the Supreme Court's clear ruling indicates this constitutional battle is far from over.
Citazioni salienti
This Court must, once again, preliminarily enjoin enforcement of the President's most recent attempt to strip the right to citizenship from them.— Judge Deborah Boardman
The Supreme Court has spoken: Children in the certified class are 'citizens at birth.'— Judge Deborah Boardman
Vuoi la storia completa?
Leggi l'originale su Al Jazeera ↗
Politics & Governance