US federal judge makes big move! Class action lawsuit halts new "birthright citizenship" policy, Trump suffers another legal setback
2025-07-11 11:12:38
On the American political stage, the Trump administration's attempt to end the birthright citizenship policy through an executive order has caused an uproar. This policy attempts to subvert the U.S. Constitution's guarantee of birthright citizenship for more than a century, sparking heated debate from all walks of life. However, on Thursday (July 10), a federal judge successfully blocked the implementation of this controversial policy nationwide by using a class action lawsuit as a weapon. This legal battle not only challenges the authority of the Trump administration, but also opens a new chapter in the interpretation and application of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
The core and controversy of the policy
In January 2025, at the beginning of his second term, Trump signed a highly controversial executive order, declaring that children born in the United States will not automatically obtain U.S. citizenship if neither of their parents is a U.S. citizen or permanent legal resident. This policy directly challenges the clause in the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution that "all persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof shall be citizens of the United States", and attempts to redefine the legal understanding of "birthright citizenship" for more than a century.
This policy is regarded as a core component of the Trump administration's immigration policy, which aims to restrict the citizenship of illegal immigrants and their children. However, it has sparked widespread criticism since its launch. Supporters believe that this policy is a restriction on illegal immigrants and temporary visitors to the United States, which is in line with the need to safeguard national interests; while opponents point out that this not only violates the spirit of the Constitution, but will also cause an irreversible identity crisis for tens of thousands of children born in the United States.
The Supreme Court’s Limitations and New Challenges
Just as this policy sparked heated debate, the U.S. Supreme Court made an important ruling in June 2025, restricting lower courts from issuing nationwide bans in similar cases. This means that any legal action attempting to stop Trump's policy must find new ways. The Supreme Court's ruling seemingly cleared the way for the Trump administration's policy, but it also provided opponents with a new legal strategy - seeking broader relief through class action lawsuits.
New Hampshire Class Action Lawsuit
On Thursday (July 10), New Hampshire federal district judge Joseph Laplante made a ruling that shocked the United States: he approved a class action lawsuit against the Trump administration's "birthright citizenship" policy, successfully blocking the implementation of the policy nationwide. The class action lawsuit was initiated by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) on behalf of children born in the United States who may be deprived of citizenship due to Trump's new policy.
The plaintiffs in the lawsuit include three immigrants: a pregnant woman, a woman who gave birth in April 2024, and the father of a baby born in March 2024. On behalf of their children and other children born in the United States, they argued that Trump's policy violated the clear provisions of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Judge Laplante pointed out in his ruling that the executive order was "extremely controversial in its constitutionality" and attempted to deprive thousands of people of their citizenship without sufficient legislative debate, so it was necessary to take swift action to stop it.
Legal breakthrough for class action lawsuit
Judge LaPlante’s ruling cleverly circumvented the Supreme Court’s restrictions on nationwide injunctions. He approved class-action lawsuits, allowing legal remedies to be sought on behalf of a large number of individuals in similar situations. This approach not only circumvented the Supreme Court’s restrictions, but also opened up new possibilities for legal actions against Trump’s policies. LaPlante was appointed by President George W. Bush, and his decisive judicial actions highlight the important role of the judicial system in balancing executive power.
The Opponents' Victory
The American Civil Liberties Union highly praised the ruling. Carol Rose, executive director of the ACLU Massachusetts chapter, said: "This ruling reaffirms that the U.S. Constitution equally grants citizenship to all babies born in the United States, not just those whose parents have citizenship or permanent residency." This victory is seen as a major blow to the Trump administration's immigration policy and has injected new momentum into the fight to defend constitutional rights.
The White House's angry response
White House spokesman Harrison Fields expressed strong dissatisfaction with the ruling, calling it a "blatant and illegal attempt to circumvent the clear order of the Supreme Court." The White House's response shows the Trump administration's unwillingness to accept this judicial setback, and also foreshadows that there may be more legal and political games in the future.
Legal experts’ interpretation
Legal experts believe that Laplante's ruling is not only a tactical victory, but also an affirmation of class action lawsuits as a powerful tool to challenge government policies. Elora Mukherjee, director of the Immigrant Rights Clinic at Columbia Law School, said: "Class action lawsuits remain a key mechanism for protecting civil and constitutional rights. This ruling is significant and shows that the judicial system can play an important role in confronting excessive expansion of executive power."
The legal battle continues
Although the New Hampshire ruling temporarily blocked the implementation of Trump's policy, the legal battle over birthright citizenship is far from over. The Supreme Court's ruling only postponed the implementation of the executive order until late July, and did not make a final judgment on the fundamental legality of the policy. In the future, the court may need to further examine the scope of the Fourteenth Amendment and whether executive orders can unilaterally change the traditional interpretation of constitutional provisions.
Far-reaching social and political impact
Trump's new "birthright citizenship" policy is not only an immigration policy, but also touches on the profound discussion of identity, equality and core constitutional values in American society. This dispute may further exacerbate the division in American society, and will also test the role of the judicial system in balancing administrative power and constitutional rights. For tens of thousands of children born in the United States and their families, the outcome of this legal battle will directly affect their future.
The ruling of a federal judge in New Hampshire has set up a new legal obstacle for the Trump administration's "birthright citizenship" policy and injected new hope into the defense of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. This legal storm surrounding citizenship is not only a contest between judicial and executive power, but also a profound test of America's core values. In the future, as the class action lawsuit progresses and the Supreme Court makes its final ruling, this controversy is bound to continue to attract the attention of the entire country.
Analysis of the impact on the US dollar:
In the short term, this ruling may cause market uncertainty. Trump's immigration policies are seen as restrictive measures on the economy and labor market. If they are stopped, it may ease the concerns of some investors, especially in industries that rely on immigrant labor (such as agriculture and construction). This may provide slight support for the US dollar as the market may expect a more stable economic environment. However, strong opposition from the White House and the potential continuation of the legal battle may increase policy uncertainty, causing small fluctuations or pressure on the US dollar.
In the long run, if the birthright citizenship policy is completely abolished, it may have a profound impact on the US population structure and economic growth. Maintaining birthright citizenship may attract more immigrants, expand the labor supply and consumer market, and theoretically benefit economic growth and the value of the US dollar. However, if the subsequent legal battle leads to policy reversals, market confidence may be damaged and the US dollar may face downward pressure.
At 11:11 Beijing time, the US dollar index is currently at 97.83.
Background: Trump's new policy of "birthright citizenship" sparks controversy
The core and controversy of the policy
In January 2025, at the beginning of his second term, Trump signed a highly controversial executive order, declaring that children born in the United States will not automatically obtain U.S. citizenship if neither of their parents is a U.S. citizen or permanent legal resident. This policy directly challenges the clause in the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution that "all persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof shall be citizens of the United States", and attempts to redefine the legal understanding of "birthright citizenship" for more than a century.
This policy is regarded as a core component of the Trump administration's immigration policy, which aims to restrict the citizenship of illegal immigrants and their children. However, it has sparked widespread criticism since its launch. Supporters believe that this policy is a restriction on illegal immigrants and temporary visitors to the United States, which is in line with the need to safeguard national interests; while opponents point out that this not only violates the spirit of the Constitution, but will also cause an irreversible identity crisis for tens of thousands of children born in the United States.
The Supreme Court’s Limitations and New Challenges
Just as this policy sparked heated debate, the U.S. Supreme Court made an important ruling in June 2025, restricting lower courts from issuing nationwide bans in similar cases. This means that any legal action attempting to stop Trump's policy must find new ways. The Supreme Court's ruling seemingly cleared the way for the Trump administration's policy, but it also provided opponents with a new legal strategy - seeking broader relief through class action lawsuits.
Core event: Federal judge's decisive counterattack
New Hampshire Class Action Lawsuit
On Thursday (July 10), New Hampshire federal district judge Joseph Laplante made a ruling that shocked the United States: he approved a class action lawsuit against the Trump administration's "birthright citizenship" policy, successfully blocking the implementation of the policy nationwide. The class action lawsuit was initiated by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) on behalf of children born in the United States who may be deprived of citizenship due to Trump's new policy.
The plaintiffs in the lawsuit include three immigrants: a pregnant woman, a woman who gave birth in April 2024, and the father of a baby born in March 2024. On behalf of their children and other children born in the United States, they argued that Trump's policy violated the clear provisions of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Judge Laplante pointed out in his ruling that the executive order was "extremely controversial in its constitutionality" and attempted to deprive thousands of people of their citizenship without sufficient legislative debate, so it was necessary to take swift action to stop it.
Legal breakthrough for class action lawsuit
Judge LaPlante’s ruling cleverly circumvented the Supreme Court’s restrictions on nationwide injunctions. He approved class-action lawsuits, allowing legal remedies to be sought on behalf of a large number of individuals in similar situations. This approach not only circumvented the Supreme Court’s restrictions, but also opened up new possibilities for legal actions against Trump’s policies. LaPlante was appointed by President George W. Bush, and his decisive judicial actions highlight the important role of the judicial system in balancing executive power.
Reactions from all parties: Fierce confrontation and far-reaching impact
The Opponents' Victory
The American Civil Liberties Union highly praised the ruling. Carol Rose, executive director of the ACLU Massachusetts chapter, said: "This ruling reaffirms that the U.S. Constitution equally grants citizenship to all babies born in the United States, not just those whose parents have citizenship or permanent residency." This victory is seen as a major blow to the Trump administration's immigration policy and has injected new momentum into the fight to defend constitutional rights.
The White House's angry response
White House spokesman Harrison Fields expressed strong dissatisfaction with the ruling, calling it a "blatant and illegal attempt to circumvent the clear order of the Supreme Court." The White House's response shows the Trump administration's unwillingness to accept this judicial setback, and also foreshadows that there may be more legal and political games in the future.
Legal experts’ interpretation
Legal experts believe that Laplante's ruling is not only a tactical victory, but also an affirmation of class action lawsuits as a powerful tool to challenge government policies. Elora Mukherjee, director of the Immigrant Rights Clinic at Columbia Law School, said: "Class action lawsuits remain a key mechanism for protecting civil and constitutional rights. This ruling is significant and shows that the judicial system can play an important role in confronting excessive expansion of executive power."
Future Outlook: The Next Stop in the Fight for Civil Rights
The legal battle continues
Although the New Hampshire ruling temporarily blocked the implementation of Trump's policy, the legal battle over birthright citizenship is far from over. The Supreme Court's ruling only postponed the implementation of the executive order until late July, and did not make a final judgment on the fundamental legality of the policy. In the future, the court may need to further examine the scope of the Fourteenth Amendment and whether executive orders can unilaterally change the traditional interpretation of constitutional provisions.
Far-reaching social and political impact
Trump's new "birthright citizenship" policy is not only an immigration policy, but also touches on the profound discussion of identity, equality and core constitutional values in American society. This dispute may further exacerbate the division in American society, and will also test the role of the judicial system in balancing administrative power and constitutional rights. For tens of thousands of children born in the United States and their families, the outcome of this legal battle will directly affect their future.
Conclusion: The Contest between Constitution and Power
The ruling of a federal judge in New Hampshire has set up a new legal obstacle for the Trump administration's "birthright citizenship" policy and injected new hope into the defense of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. This legal storm surrounding citizenship is not only a contest between judicial and executive power, but also a profound test of America's core values. In the future, as the class action lawsuit progresses and the Supreme Court makes its final ruling, this controversy is bound to continue to attract the attention of the entire country.
Analysis of the impact on the US dollar:
In the short term, this ruling may cause market uncertainty. Trump's immigration policies are seen as restrictive measures on the economy and labor market. If they are stopped, it may ease the concerns of some investors, especially in industries that rely on immigrant labor (such as agriculture and construction). This may provide slight support for the US dollar as the market may expect a more stable economic environment. However, strong opposition from the White House and the potential continuation of the legal battle may increase policy uncertainty, causing small fluctuations or pressure on the US dollar.
In the long run, if the birthright citizenship policy is completely abolished, it may have a profound impact on the US population structure and economic growth. Maintaining birthright citizenship may attract more immigrants, expand the labor supply and consumer market, and theoretically benefit economic growth and the value of the US dollar. However, if the subsequent legal battle leads to policy reversals, market confidence may be damaged and the US dollar may face downward pressure.
At 11:11 Beijing time, the US dollar index is currently at 97.83.
- Risk Warning and Disclaimer
- The market involves risk, and trading may not be suitable for all investors. This article is for reference only and does not constitute personal investment advice, nor does it take into account certain users’ specific investment objectives, financial situation, or other needs. Any investment decisions made based on this information are at your own risk.
