Appeals Court Strikes Down Trump Order to Curb Birthright Citizenship

04 October 2025

President Donald Trump's bid to limit birthright citizenship, in the Press Briefing Room at the White House in Washington D.C., June 27, 2025. REUTERS/Ken Cedeno/File Photo

A three-judge panel from the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Boston has rejected former President Donald Trump’s executive order that sought to restrict birthright citizenship, ruling that it clashes with the 14th Amendment and upholding nationwide injunctions that block the policy from taking effect.

Trump issued the order on January 20, 2025, directing federal agencies to deny citizenship to children born in the U.S. unless one parent already held U.S. citizenship or lawful permanent resident status. The court’s ruling came after states led by Democratic attorneys general and immigration advocacy groups secured preliminary injunctions from district courts in Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and other jurisdictions that halted enforcement nationwide.

In a 100-page opinion, Judge David Barron, writing for the majority, emphasized that the text of the 14th Amendment plainly guarantees citizenship to “all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof,” regardless of their parents’ immigration status. He noted that no branch of government in over a century has pressed so forcefully to reinterpret that foundational guarantee. The court described Trump’s attempt as a radical break from constitutional tradition and affirmed that the executive does not have the authority to rewrite citizenship rules by simply issuing policy pronouncements.

This decision echoes a previous ruling by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which in July upheld an injunction blocking the same executive order. The 1st Circuit’s ruling thus represents the second major appellate rebuff to the administration’s attempt to restrict birthright citizenship.

White House officials reacted sharply, accusing the court of misinterpreting the 14th Amendment. Spokesperson Abigail Jackson stated the administration will pursue reversal at the U.S. Supreme Court, and expressed confidence that their case will ultimately prevail.

The Supreme Court is already poised to weigh in on the matter. Earlier this year, the Court narrowed the ability of lower courts to issue sweeping universal injunctions rulings that block federal policies nationwide holding instead that courts should limit relief to the parties before them. That decision leaves open the question of whether class action or more narrowly tailored injunctions may block enforcement of the order for particular groups.

Even with procedural constraints, lower courts have persisted in maintaining blocks on the order, insisting that its nationwide reach conflicts with constitutional norms. Observers note that this latest ruling strengthens the legal consensus against Trump’s attempt and sets the stage for a potential Supreme Court showdown on the core constitutional question: whether a president can override birthright citizenship by executive fiat.

For now, the ruling maintains the status quo: children born in the U.S. continue to be recognized as citizens at birth, regardless of their parents’ immigration status.