Francey Hakes to Newsmax: Abrego Garcia Received "Due Process"

Abbie VanSickle

Live Updates: Supreme Court Limits Nationwide Injunctions in Birthright Citizenship Case


Updated
June 27, 2025, 11:30 a.m. ET1 minute ago
Abbie VanSickle

Here's the latest.


The Supreme Court on Friday limited the ability of federal judges to temporarily pause President Trump's executive orders, a major victory for the administration. But the justices made no ruling on the constitutionality of his move to end birthright citizenship, and they stopped his order from taking effect for 30 days.

The 6-to-3 decision, written by Justice Amy Coney Barrett and split along ideological lines, may dramatically reshape how citizenship is granted in the United States, even temporarily. The ruling means that the practice of extending citizenship to the U.S.-born children of undocumented immigrants and some temporary residents and visitors would end in the 28 states that have not challenged the measure.

The court's ruling appeared to upend the ability of single federal judges to freeze policies across the country, a powerful tool that has been used to block policies instituted by Democratic and Republican administrations. The majority offered a different path to challenging Mr. Trump's orders on a nationwide basis: class action lawsuits.

In a blistering dissent, Justice Sonia Sotomayor called the majority's decision "a travesty for the rule of law."

The majority stressed that it was not addressing the merits of Trump's attempt to end automatic citizenship for babies born on U.S. soil.

Here's what else to know:

  • The case before the justices arose from an executive order signed by Mr. Trump on the first day of his second term that appeared to upend the principle known as birthright citizenship, which has been part of the Constitution for more than 150 years.
  • The ability of federal judges to pause rulings for the whole country, known as a nationwide injunction, is a controversial judicial tool. They have been used to block Democratic and Republican policies.
  • Mr. Trump's order on birthright citizenship prompted immediate legal challenges from 22 Democratic-led states and immigrant advocacy organizations and pregnant women concerned that their children might not automatically be granted citizenship. Within days, federal judges in Washington State, Maryland and Massachusetts temporarily blocked the executive order.
  • In other rulings on Friday, the Court upheld the constitutionality of a task force that recommends which preventative care services health insurers must cover under the Affordable Care Act; rejected a challenge to a Texas law that seeks to limit minors' access to pornography on the internet; and ordered public schools in Maryland to allow parents with religious objections to withdraw their children from classes in which storybooks with L.G.B.T.Q. themes are discussed.

Zach Montague
June 27, 2025, 11:29 a.m. ET3 minutes ago
Zach Montague
Legal advocacy groups that have been active in fighting the Trump administration's most sweeping policies vowed to find workarounds, including class action lawsuits and parallel challenges across multiple federal districts, if necessary.

"A number of pathways remain for individuals to obtain relief from the courts," Skye Perryman, the president of Democracy Forward, said in a statement. She called the ruling "disappointing and yet another obstacle" to protect constitutional rights.
Jazmine Ulloa
June 27, 2025, 11:21 a.m. ET10 minutes ago
Jazmine Ulloa
Civil and immigrant rights activists, advocates and lawyers on Friday denounced the Supreme Court decision on birthright citizenship as a major blow to long-settled constitutional law, saying it would create chaos and a dangerous patchwork of rights across the nation.

Krish O'Mara Vignarajah, president and chief executive of Global Refuge, called it "a deeply troubling moment not only for immigrant families, but for the legal uniformity that underpins our Constitution."

Julián Castro, the one-time Democratic presidential candidate and former federal housing secretary, said the decision hampered the judiciary at a time when the Trump administration was endangering the constitutional rights of all Americans. "The ruling hands more power to a president that is determined to usurp as much authority as he can and flout the law constantly," said Castro, who now heads the Latino Community Foundation.


 

Ask a Question

Share this page

Get a free case review from a lawyer
Back
Top