After the Supreme Court restricted nationwide injunctions, a federal judge turned to a class action suit to block Trump's order to end birthright citizenship
The administration is essentially asserting that Trump should be allowed to override "the Constitution itself," an intolerable proposition.
(Image credit: Anna Moneymaker / Getty Images)
By The Week US
published 7 hours ago
A federal judge in New Hampshire has opened "a new front in the battle" over President Trump's efforts to end birthright citizenship, said Adam Liptak in The New York Times. Two weeks ago Trump scored a major win when the Supreme Court curbed lower courts' power to block administration policies through nationwide injunctions. A Trump executive order ending the 157-year-old policy whereby any baby born in the U.S. becomes a citizen had been blocked by such an injunction. But in their ruling, the justices made clear that class action suits could still be used to seek nationwide injunctions. And now Judge Joseph Laplante has certified such a suit on behalf of all children born to parents who are unauthorized or here temporarily, and barred enforcement of Trump's order. The administration blasted Laplante as a "rogue judge" and filed an appeal.
Laplante is no "judge gone rogue," said Damon Root in Reason. He's a George W. Bush appointee whose "well-reasoned" ruling is notable for its "careful judicial adherence" to the Supreme Court's dictates. He said it was an easy call to determine that the group in question both met the criteria for a class action suit—which lets people facing a common issue band together as plaintiffs—and was entitled to relief. Whether Laplante's certification of the class action suit will hold up on appeal "remains to be seen," said The Wall Street Journal in an editorial. "Sorry to spoil your summer plans, Justices," but the question may soon land before the Supreme Court.
The issue could become "a showdown" between Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Samuel Alito, said Benjamin Parker in The Bulwark. Both chose to limit the use of nationwide injunctions, but while Alito warned judges against letting class action suits achieve the same effect, Kavanaugh appeared to invite such suits. That hints at a split among the high court's conservatives over whether the court will ultimately green-light Trump's birthright citizenship order and its "brazen attack on the 14th Amendment." It must not, said the New York Daily News in an editorial. The administration is essentially asserting that Trump should be allowed to override "the Constitution itself," an intolerable proposition. And letting Trump's order go into effect would result in "catastrophic and cascading harms," making every individual born to temporary or undocumented residents "effectively stateless in their own country of birth." This sorry affair must end with the high court unequivocally ruling that "attempts to end birthright citizenship are unconstitutional on the merits, full stop."
A federal judge in New Hampshire has opened "a new front in the battle" over President Trump's efforts to end birthright citizenship, said Adam Liptak in The New York Times. Two weeks ago Trump scored a major win when the Supreme Court curbed lower courts' power to block administration policies through nationwide injunctions. A Trump executive order ending the 157-year-old policy whereby any baby born in the U.S. becomes a citizen had been blocked by such an injunction. But in their ruling, the justices made clear that class action suits could still be used to seek nationwide injunctions. And now Judge Joseph Laplante has certified such a suit on behalf of all children born to parents who are unauthorized or here temporarily, and barred enforcement of Trump's order. The administration blasted Laplante as a "rogue judge" and filed an appeal.
Laplante is no "judge gone rogue," said Damon Root in Reason. He's a George W. Bush appointee whose "well-reasoned" ruling is notable for its "careful judicial adherence" to the Supreme Court's dictates. He said it was an easy call to determine that the group in question both met the criteria for a class action suit—which lets people facing a common issue band together as plaintiffs—and was entitled to relief. Whether Laplante's certification of the class action suit will hold up on appeal "remains to be seen," said The Wall Street Journal in an editorial. "Sorry to spoil your summer plans, Justices," but the question may soon land before the Supreme Court.
The issue could become "a showdown" between Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Samuel Alito, said Benjamin Parker in The Bulwark. Both chose to limit the use of nationwide injunctions, but while Alito warned judges against letting class action suits achieve the same effect, Kavanaugh appeared to invite such suits. That hints at a split among the high court's conservatives over whether the court will ultimately green-light Trump's birthright citizenship order and its "brazen attack on the 14th Amendment." It must not, said the New York Daily News in an editorial. The administration is essentially asserting that Trump should be allowed to override "the Constitution itself," an intolerable proposition. And letting Trump's order go into effect would result in "catastrophic and cascading harms," making every individual born to temporary or undocumented residents "effectively stateless in their own country of birth." This sorry affair must end with the high court unequivocally ruling that "attempts to end birthright citizenship are unconstitutional on the merits, full stop."
No comments:
Post a Comment