US Appeals Court Blocks Trump’s Birthright Citizenship Order as Unconstitutional
In a historic ruling on July 24, 2025, a federal appeals court upheld a lower court’s decision and declared President Donald Trump’s executive order to terminate birthright citizenship unconstitutional. Signed on January 20, 2025, the order challenged the 14th Amendment’s long-standing guarantee by attempting to deny U.S. citizenship to children born on American soil to parents who lack documentation or are on temporary visas. The constitutional idea that all people born in the United States are citizens, regardless of their parents’ immigration status, is upheld by this decision, which has been heralded as a victory for immigrant rights. This legal dispute, which has broad ramifications for families and national policy, comes at a pivotal point in the American immigration debate, as the Trump administration promises to appeal.
The decision of the appeals court follows a string of lower court decisions, including one rendered on July 10, 2025, by U.S. District Judge Joseph Laplante in New Hampshire, who blocked the order through a class-action lawsuit filed on behalf of the parents and children who were impacted. The lawsuit, supported by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and other advocacy organizations, claimed that Trump’s order was in violation of the Citizenship Clause of the 14th Amendment, which declares that “all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States.” Citing the Supreme Court’s 1898 decision in United States v. Wong Kim Ark, the appeals court rejected the administration’s argument that birthright citizenship, or jus soli, does not apply to children and upheld it as a constitutional right.
“Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship,” Trump’s executive order, sought to limit citizenship to children whose at least one parent is a citizen or lawful permanent resident of the United States. Critics blasted the administration’s position as a misreading of established law, claiming that the 14th Amendment’s “subject to the jurisdiction” clause excludes people born to non-citizens. However, the Supreme Court’s June 27, 2025, decision limited nationwide injunctions, leading to class-action lawsuits as a workaround. The order immediately sparked legal challenges, with courts in Maryland, Massachusetts, Washington, and New Hampshire issuing injunctions. Because the plaintiffs emphasized the “irreparable harm” of denying this fundamental right, the appeals court’s ruling upholds Laplante’s injunction, preventing an estimated 150,000 newborns annually from losing citizenship.
The decision has sparked controversy as well as joy. Assuring constitutional protections for all children born in the United States is “a huge victory,” according to ACLU attorney Cody Wofsy, who emphasized that citizenship is “the greatest privilege that exists in the world.” Fearing deportation and family separation, immigrant families, including a Brazilian father in Florida and a Honduran asylum seeker, expressed relief. On the other hand, the Trump administration, supported by 21 states, claims that illegal immigration is encouraged by birthright citizenship and calls it a “invasion.” The Supreme Court is anticipated to hear the case during its October 2025 term, and the White House has indicated that it intends to appeal to the court, which could influence how the 14th Amendment is interpreted going forward.
Advocates have warned that if the order were implemented, there would be chaos and discrimination, which highlights the wider tensions in U.S. immigration policy. The ruling of the appeals court protects the rights of thousands of families by guaranteeing that birthright citizenship will continue to exist for the time being. This decision is a testament to the judiciary’s role in protecting constitutional guarantees against executive overreach, as the country awaits the Supreme Court’s final decision.
Keep checking back for more information on this important court case and how it will affect immigration in America.
