A federal judge has issued a temporary injunction against an executive order from former President Trump aimed at limiting automatic birthright citizenship for certain individuals.
Upon resuming his presidency last year, Trump has actively pursued measures to eliminate or restrict birthright citizenship. Following a Supreme Court ruling in June that invalidated his earlier attempt, he enacted a more constrained executive order last month. This order sought to deny citizenship to children of “alien enemies,” foreign government workers, and individuals accused of participating in “birth tourism.”
On Wednesday, U.S. District Judge Deborah Boardman intervened, suspending the enforcement of this latest executive order. She determined that the plaintiffs in the case are likely to prevail in demonstrating that the order contravenes the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which guarantees citizenship to “all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof.” Boardman referenced the prior Supreme Court decision, asserting its status as “the law of the land.”
“The 2026 Executive 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 remarked. “This Court must, once again, preliminarily enjoin enforcement of the President’s most recent attempt to strip the right to citizenship from them.”
CBS News has sought a response from the White House regarding this matter.
Trump’s executive order specifically targeted “birth tourism,” describing it as a practice where individuals engage in a “commercial transaction” to enter the U.S. before giving birth. Additionally, it aimed to restrict citizenship for children whose parents are classified as “alien enemies” due to affiliations with terrorist organizations, a label the Trump administration has extended to include drug cartels.
Government attorneys contended that the Supreme Court’s earlier ruling did not inhibit the Trump administration from creating regulations to limit birthright citizenship. They highlighted that certain exceptions, such as for children of diplomats and alien enemies, have historically been acknowledged.
In their legal arguments, Justice Department representatives stated that the Supreme Court only concluded that children of temporary or undocumented immigrants—those included in Trump’s initial efforts—”are not disqualified from birthright citizenship.” However, they emphasized that the Court “never suggested that every child born to such parents is per se a citizen, with no exceptions.”
The plaintiffs, which encompass several immigrants and the advocacy organization CASA, contended that the historically recognized exceptions to birthright citizenship are limited, and the new executive order is unconstitutionally “attempting to expand those categories.”
“The President has no authority to unilaterally alter the Constitution, and he should be restrained from denying citizenship to members of the certified class under this or any other Executive Order,” the plaintiffs’ legal team asserted last week.
The plaintiffs’ lawyers expressed concerns that the “risk that Defendants might deprive class members of citizenship based on false allegations against their parents is credible.” They pointed out that the Trump administration has broadly defined “alien enemies” to include alleged members of certain transnational criminal organizations, with some individuals deported under this classification denying any gang involvement.
Furthermore, some plaintiffs expressed worries that merely purchasing a plane ticket to the U.S. could lead to potential violations of the executive order’s provisions regarding individuals participating in a “commercial transaction.”
