Birthright Citizenship at Issue in Latest Federal Trial Court Rulings

On July 11, 2025, Judge Joseph Laplante of the United States District Court of the District of New Hampshire blocked an executive order ending birthright citizenship for babies across the nation. This would include babies of undocumented parents and those born to academics in the United States on student visas. Judge Laplante paused his order for seven days, permitting time for an appeal.

The Trump Administration has sought to undo the 14th Amendment through executive fiat. He has sought to make children born in the United States to undocumented immigrants or children on student visas non-citizens. The lawsuit was filed by the ACLU at the end of June 2025, just hours after the Supreme Court limited the use of nationwide injunctions.

In its ruling in June 2025, the Supreme Court did not address the actual merits of the executive order, only the procedure by which lower courts could limit the executive branch’s alleged overreach. Although the high Court closed the door on nationwide injunctions, class actions were still permitted as a means for large groups of people to file a lawsuit challenging government action.

To form a class action lawsuit, the petitioners must demonstrate the following:

(1) members of the proposed class are so numerous that joinder is impracticable;

(2) there are questions of law and fact common to the class;

(3) the claims of the petitioners are typical of the claims of the class members;

(4) Petitioners and their counsel, as representatives of the class, will fairly and adequately protect the interests of the class.

The class includes the following:

All current and future persons who are born on or after February 20, 2025, where (1) that person’s mother was unlawfully present in the United States and the person’s father was not a United States citizen or lawful permanent resident at the time of said person’s birth, or (2) that person’s mother’s presence in the United States was lawful but temporary, and the person’s father was not a United States citizen or lawful permanent resident at the time of said person’s birth.

There is no doubt that every person born in the United States after February 20, 2025, will contain too many people for individual lawsuits to be filed. The courts would be forever swamped if a single decision isn’t made on this issue. Each baby, and their parents, would all have the same question – are they U.S. citizens by virtue of being born in an American state or territory?

The Plain Text of the Constitution Supports Birthright Citizenship

The citizenship clause of the 14^th Amendment reads as follows:

“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.”

The first half of the amendment is pretty straight forward. Everyone born or naturalized in the United States is an American citizen and a citizen of the state where they live. The confusion comes from the middle portion of the text – “and subject to the jurisdiction thereof.” This portion of the clause has been interpreted to mean that persons subject to the laws of other countries are excluded, such as diplomats or soldiers of foreign countries.

Most opponents of birthright citizenship have argued that the “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” excludes the children of illegal immigrants. Opponents point to the original intent of the 14^th Amendment, which was to enshrine the citizenship of newly emancipated slaves in the Constitution. Since slavery has been banned for over a century in the United States, the 14^th Amendment should not apply to the children of illegal immigrants.

However, the plain text of the 14^th Amendment is clear. “All persons” born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof are citizens. Citizenship is not limited to slaves, and the plain text of the Constitution does not suggest such a limitation was ever contemplated.

Enlarging the jurisdiction language to exclude certain persons from citizenship would be extremely ironic. The 14^th Amendment was designed to overturn the Dred Scott decision, which was a ruling by the Supreme Court declaring that Africans could never be citizens of the United States. The Dred Scott decision in 1857 was so legally and morally wrong that it indirectly led to the American Civil War only 4 years later in 1861.

America of 2025 should not be emulating Dred Scott by denying citizenship to certain classes of people. The whole point of the 14^th Amendment was to undo that horrendous precedent. If the Supreme Court should reverse that portion of the 14^th Amendment, the consequences could well be the same as they were in 1857-1861 when the original Dred Scott was published.

Do I Need an Immigration Attorney?

If you need help with any immigration matters, including a visa application or a green card application, it is essential to contact an immigration attorney. Immigration laws are complex and have many deadlines that must be met. A skilled attorney can help you overcome these challenges to get the best outcome for you and your family.