New Hampshire judge to hear arguments on class action against Trump’s
birthright citizenship order
[July 10, 2025]
By HOLLY RAMER and MIKE CATALINI
CONCORD, N.H. (AP) — A federal judge in New Hampshire will hear
arguments Thursday on whether to certify a class-action lawsuit that
would include every baby affected by President Donald Trump’s
restrictions on birthright citizenship.
The lawsuit, filed on behalf of a pregnant woman, two parents and their
infants, is among numerous cases challenging Trump’s January order
denying citizenship to those born to parents living in the U.S.
illegally or temporarily. Represented by the American Civil Liberties
Union and others, the plaintiffs are seeking to have their case
certified as a class action and to block implementation of the order
while litigation continues.
“Tens of thousands of babies and their parents may be exposed to the
order’s myriad harms in just weeks and need an injunction now,” lawyers
for the plaintiffs wrote in court documents filed Tuesday.
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 says the phrase “subject to the jurisdiction thereof”
means the U.S. can deny citizenship to babies born to women in the
country illegally, ending what has been seen as an intrinsic part of
U.S. law for more than a century.
“Prior misimpressions of the citizenship clause have created a perverse
incentive for illegal immigration that has negatively impacted this
country’s sovereignty, national security, and economic stability,”
government lawyers wrote in the New Hampshire case. “The Constitution
does not harbor a windfall clause granting American citizenship to … the
children of those who have circumvented (or outright defied) federal
immigration laws.”
Legal battles continue in multiple states
Several federal judges have issued nationwide injunctions stopping
Trump’s order from taking effect, but the U.S. 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.
New Jersey and the more than dozen states joining its case in
Massachusetts federal court have asked the judge to determine if the
nationwide injunction in their case could still apply under the high
court’s ruling. The judge has scheduled a hearing for July 18.
[to top of second column]
|
“Everybody knows there’s a 30-day clock, so our hope is that we get an
answer prior to the end of the 30-day clock,” New Jersey Attorney
General Matt Platkin told The Associated Press in a recent interview.
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, the plaintiff in a 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.
Ama Frimpong, legal director at CASA, said the group has been stressing
to its members and clients that it is not time to panic.
“No one has to move states right this instant,” she said. “There’s
different avenues through which we are all fighting, again, to make sure
that this executive order never actually sees the light of day.”
New Hampshire plaintiffs include parents, babies
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.
___
Catalini reported from Trenton, New Jersey.
All contents © copyright 2025 Associated Press. All rights reserved |
