The Supreme Court issued a 6-3 ruling, along ideological lines, allowing President Trump’s executive order on birthright citizenship to go into effect in specific areas of the country.
The high court’s decision curtails judges’ ability to block the president’s policies nationwide by challenging the use of nationwide injunctions issued by federal district judges.
The big picture: Justice Amy Coney Barrett, writing for the court’s six Republican-appointed justices, noted that these nationwide injunctions, known as universal injunctions, may exceed the equitable authority Congress has granted to federal courts.
- However, the ruling does not conclusively decide on the constitutionality of Trump’s restrictions on birthright citizenship, leaving the door open for further legal challenges that could reach the Supreme Court again.
Go deeper: The Supreme Court’s decision narrows the lower court rulings to only block Trump’s order from being applied to the 22 Democratic-led states, expectant mothers, and immigration organizations currently suing the administration.
- The Trump administration can now move forward with developing guidance to implement the order but is required to wait 30 days before attempting to deny citizenship to individuals affected by the restrictions.
- While the majority of justices limited the scope of the injunctions, they left the possibility for plaintiffs to file class action lawsuits to seek broad relief.
- In dissent, the court’s three Democratic-appointed justices accused the administration of gamesmanship and criticized their colleagues for potentially setting a dangerous legal precedent that could undermine individual rights.
Driving the news: Trump’s executive order restricts birthright citizenship for children born on U.S. soil if they do not have at least one parent with permanent legal status, challenging the traditional interpretation of the 14th Amendment’s Citizenship Clause.
- Despite previous court decisions finding Trump’s order likely unconstitutional, the Supreme Court chose to partially allow the order to go into effect, leading the cases to return to lower courts for further proceedings.
- The administration argued for a reduction in nationwide injunctions, citing judicial overreach, while critics argue that these injunctions reflect concerns over the legality of Trump’s actions on issues like birthright citizenship.
