A federal judge has issued a class-wide injunction against Trump’s order on birthright citizenship, despite a recent Supreme Court ruling limiting such broad legal actions. The move raises concerns about the judiciary’s role and the potential for more challenges ahead.
Key Facts:
- U.S. District Judge Joseph Laplante blocked Trump’s birthright citizenship order on Thursday.
- He granted class-action status to babies affected by the executive order.
- The ruling comes after the Supreme Court limited lower courts’ authority to issue nationwide injunctions.
- The ACLU filed the lawsuit, claiming “irreparable harm” would be done without the injunction.
- Justice Alito warned that broad class relief could undermine the Supreme Court’s limits on lower court authority.
The Rest of The Story:
In the wake of a Supreme Court ruling designed to curb the power of lower courts to impose sweeping injunctions, a federal judge has done just that.
Judge Joseph Laplante blocked former President Donald Trump’s executive order that would restrict birthright citizenship and granted class-action status to those impacted—namely, babies who would otherwise qualify for citizenship.
The American Civil Liberties Union filed the lawsuit, warning that the executive order could inflict “irreparable harm” on newborns.
The judge’s move appears to be an attempt to legally protect all potentially affected individuals under one broad umbrella, sidestepping the Supreme Court’s clear direction that injunctions should apply only to parties directly involved in a case.
In the Supreme Court’s prior ruling, Justice Amy Coney Barrett stated, “The issuance of a universal injunction can be justified only as an exercise of equitable authority, yet Congress has granted federal courts no such power.”
Justice Samuel Alito went further in his warning: “Today’s decision will have very little value if district courts award relief to broadly defined classes without following ‘Rule 23’s procedural protections’ for class certification.”
Judge Joseph Laplante has BLOCKED President Trump’s Executive Order to end birthright citizenship after the Supreme Court already ruled against nationwide injuctions.
No one elected judges to make nationwide policy. This needs to end. pic.twitter.com/RMAFf7wnpk
— Rep. Mike Collins (@RepMikeCollins) July 10, 2025
Commentary:
Justice Alito’s words now seem prophetic.
His caution against judges granting class-wide relief in defiance of proper procedure is exactly what unfolded in New Hampshire.
The federal judge’s ruling looks like an intentional work-around designed to blunt the Supreme Court’s decision.
This trend of lower courts pushing ideological rulings beyond their jurisdiction is dangerous.
It represents a disturbing shift in how federal judges view their roles—not as neutral arbiters of the law but as political actors with an agenda to advance.
It’s disgraceful for any judge to actively circumvent the highest court in the land.
The Supreme Court made it clear that universal injunctions go beyond the lawful powers of district courts.
Judge Laplante’s action undermines the rule of law and sets a troubling precedent.
The Supreme Court exists to ensure national legal consistency.
When lower courts defy that structure, they erode public trust and muddy the waters of justice.
It signals a breakdown in judicial discipline, where personal or political convictions override legal norms.
Birthright citizenship is already a controversial issue with profound national implications.
When rogue judges insert themselves into the matter through procedural tricks, they risk politicizing the court system even further.
It now seems inevitable that this legal battle will land back before the Supreme Court.
And it should.
Only the highest court can definitively settle whether class-wide injunctions in such cases are legal and appropriate.
This incident also raises questions about the ACLU’s role.
While they claim to protect the vulnerable, their use of class certification to push for broad political outcomes suggests a strategy aimed at shaping national policy from the courtroom.
America deserves a legal system that applies the law as written—not one manipulated to serve political goals through legal loopholes.
The Bottom Line:
A federal judge has challenged the Supreme Court’s authority by issuing a class-wide injunction on Trump’s birthright citizenship order.
The move mirrors the exact legal concerns Justice Alito previously warned about.
As judicial activism escalates, it’s increasingly likely this issue will return to the Supreme Court for final resolution.
The future of birthright citizenship and judicial restraint may now hang in the balance.
Read Next
– LA Mayor Bass Sues to Stop Immigration Raids as City Spirals Out of Control
– James Brennan, James Comey Under Criminal Investigation For Roles in Russia Hoax
– Obama Judge Lets Trump Pull $800M in Grants—But Blasts Decision as “Shameful”
– Supreme Court Greenlights Trump’s Plans to Downsize Federal Workforce in Surprise 8-1 Decision
