The U.S. Supreme Court has issued a 6-3 ruling that restricted federal judges' ability to issue nationwide injunctions against President Donald Trump’s executive order on birthright citizenship.
Authored by Justice Amy Coney Barrett, the decision directed lower courts in Maryland, Massachusetts, and Washington state to reassess their orders blocking Trump’s directive, which seeks to deny citizenship to children born in the U.S. to non-citizen or non-permanent resident parents.
The ruling, which delays the policy’s enforcement for 30 days, did not address its constitutionality, leaving open the possibility of partial implementation across the country.
The decision marks a significant win for Trump, who described it as a “monumental victory for the Constitution, the separation of powers and the rule of law.”
The order, signed on his first day back in office, aims to alter the 14th Amendment’s long-standing guarantee of citizenship to those born on U.S. soil.
Critics, including the American Civil Liberties Union, called the policy “blatantly illegal and cruel,” warning it could affect over 150,000 newborns annually.
Liberal Justice Sonia Sotomayor, dissenting with the court’s other liberal justices, labeled the ruling a “travesty for the rule of law,” arguing it sidesteps the order’s apparent unconstitutionality.
The ruling leaves the policy’s future unclear, with lower courts now tasked with tailoring their injunctions to apply only to specific plaintiffs, such as the 22 states and advocacy groups that challenged it.
In states not covered by these lawsuits, the policy could take effect within 30 days, though practical implementation remains vague.
Attorney General Pam Bondi deflected questions about enforcement details, stating, “This is all pending litigation.”
Meanwhile, challengers are pursuing class action lawsuits to seek broader protections, and the debate over nationwide injunctions continues to shape Trump’s broader policy agenda, from immigration to federal funding.