‘Likely unconstitutional’: US judge partially halts Trump’s latest birthright citizenship order

Trump issued the executive order after the US Supreme Court blocked his original order in August

A US federal judge on Wednesday (local time) blocked President Donald Trump’s latest attempt to restrict birthright citizenship, partially halting an executive order issued after the US Supreme Court rejected his broader effort to end the practice.US District Judge Deborah Boardman said the latest policy was “likely unconstitutional,” citing the Supreme Court’s August ruling against Trump’s earlier attempt to restrict birthright citizenship.However, Boardman allowed federal agencies to continue preparing guidance for implementing the policy. Her order applies to the certified class of legal challengers in the case, including children who would have been denied citizenship under Trump’s original executive order.“If not enjoined as to the class, the 2026 Executive Order could deny the right to citizenship by birth to children whom the Supreme Court declared were citizens,” Boardman, an appointee of former President Joe Biden, wrote in her opinion.Through his latest executive action, Trump sought to tighten existing rules and narrow recognised exceptions to birthright citizenship, a principle under the 14th Amendment that grants citizenship to people born on US soil regardless of their parents’ immigration status.Under the new order, federal agencies would not recognise the citizenship of children whose parents are not US citizens if either parent is “an alien enemy”, “a foreign government employee”, or involved in so-called birth tourism.Immediately after returning to White House in January last year, Trump issued an executive order seeking to deny citizenship to babies born in the United States to parents who were unlawfully present in the country or visiting under temporary status.The Supreme Court rejected that order by a 6-3 majority, holding it unconstitutional. Trump subsequently issued the narrower executive action that has been challenged in a federal court.A separate case challenging the new policy is also pending in New Hampshire.(With ANI inputs)