GREENBELT, Md. — A federal judge has given the Justice Department until noon Tuesday to clarify its plans regarding the implementation of an executive order aimed at restricting birthright citizenship, following a recent Supreme Court decision to lift nationwide injunctions against the measure.
During a court hearing on Monday, Justice Department attorney Brad Rosenberg indicated that the Trump administration intends to hold off on enforcing the order, which would deny citizenship to children born in the U.S. if their parents lack citizenship status, for four weeks. This delay aligns with the Supreme Court’s recent ruling, which imposed a grace period before any actions are taken.
Judge Deborah Boardman, overseeing the case in U.S. District Court, expressed her desire for written confirmation of the government’s legal position. She questioned whether the administration believes it can begin deporting children who are affected by the order but are not part of the existing legal challenges. Boardman mandated that Rosenberg provide a detailed response in writing before the deadline.
Last week, the Supreme Court concluded that while district court judges could issue injunctions to protect the named plaintiffs in their respective cases, they lacked the authority to impose broader, nation-wide restrictions on the executive order. However, the ruling acknowledged that class actions could still seek broader injunctive relief.
Attorneys representing immigrant parents returned to court to push for class action status for their clients, aiming to include all children born or expected to be born in the U.S. after February 19, 2025. This group is particularly significant, as estimates indicate that the ban on birthright citizenship could impact up to 250,000 newborns annually.
With the uncertainty surrounding the executive order, the plaintiffs’ attorneys have also filed for a preliminary injunction to prevent potential harm while their request for class certification is under consideration. They are concerned about the broader implications of the order, not just the threat of removal.
William Powell, an attorney representing the plaintiffs, highlighted the emotional toll the situation takes on families. He recounted the story of a plaintiff whose pregnancy has become a source of stress due to fears about her child’s future citizenship status. Powell emphasized that potential members of the class are grappling with confusion and anxiety over the implications of the executive order.
President Trump issued the controversial order on January 20, asserting that automatic citizenship should not apply to all born within U.S. borders, particularly targeting children of undocumented immigrants or those on temporary visas unless they have a citizen parent or a permanent legal resident among them.
Rosenberg opposed the motion for class certification, arguing that it could be disadvantageous for the government. He also noted that plaintiffs could have pursued class status before the Supreme Court’s decision last week.
The lawsuit, brought by the immigrant advocacy group CASA and the Asylum Seeker Advocacy Project, involves 15 women from nine states, including Maryland, Florida, Georgia, and New Jersey, among others. Several of these plaintiffs are in the U.S. without documentation or have pending immigration applications at various stages.
This article was automatically written by Open AI and the people, facts, circumstances, and story may be inaccurate. Any article can be requested to be removed, retracted, or corrected by writing an email to contact@publiclawlibrary.org.