Supreme Court limits judges’ ability to block Trump’s birthright citizenship ban
- Share via
- The ruling prevents a single district judge in Boston or San Francisco from blocking Trump’s policies from taking effect nationwide.
- The court’s three liberals dissented.
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court has limited the power of federal district judges to hand down orders that apply nationwide.
By 6-3 vote, the justices said Friday that judges may not issue orders that apply to people beyond those who sued.
“Federal courts do not exercise general oversight of the Executive Branch,” said Justice Amy Coney Barrett. And while judges can give full relief to plaintiffs, including groups of people, their injunctions should not be “broader than necessary” to shield those people.
The court’s three liberals dissented.
In her dissent, Justice Sonia Sotomayor said the Trump administration is trying to defend a blatantly unconstitutional order repealing birthright citizenship.
“The gamesmanship in this request is apparent and the Government makes no attempt to hide it. Yet, shamefully, this Court plays along,” she said.
The procedural ruling is a victory for President Trump and a setback for advocates who seek to block his executive orders.
It prevents a single district judge in Boston or San Francisco from blocking Trump’s policies from taking effect nationwide.
However, it does not decide on the constitutionality of Trump’s plan to limit birthright citizenship.
Three federal district judges — in Maryland, Massachusetts and Washington — issued nationwide orders declaring Trump’s plan unconstitutional.
Can one federal judge block Trump’s plan to deny citizenship to babies whose parents are not U.S. citizens?
The 14th Amendment, adopted in 1868, says “All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.”
On his first day in office, Trump issued an executive order disagreeing with the traditional understanding and asserting the Constitution does not “extend citizenship universally to everyone born within the United States.”
He said it would be U.S. policy to not recognize citizenship for newborns if the child’s mother or father was “not a United States citizen or lawful permanent resident at the time of said person’s birth.”
But in quick succession, judges declared Trump’s order may not be enforced across the nation. They said his proposed restrictions violated the federal law and Supreme Court precedent as well as the plain words of the 14th Amendment.
Rather than challenge those rulings directly, Trump’s lawyers sent an emergency appeal to the Supreme Court with “a modest request.”
Rather than rule on birthright citizenship, they urged the justices to rein in the practice of district judges handing down nationwide orders.
They have “reached epidemic proportions since the start of the current administration,” they said.
Get the L.A. Times Politics newsletter
Deeply reported insights into legislation, politics and policy from Sacramento, Washington and beyond. In your inbox twice per week.
You may occasionally receive promotional content from the Los Angeles Times.
