Massive setback for Donald Trump: Appeals court strikes down birthright citizenship order nationwide

A federal appeals court has ruled Donald Trump’s executive order denying automatic citizenship to US-born children of non-citizen parents as unconstitutional, blocking it nationwide.

Written By Ravi Hari
Published24 Jul 2025, 08:29 PM IST
Massive legal blow to Donald Trump: Appeals court strikes down his order to end birthright citizenship, calling it unconstitutional. Ruling blocks enforcement nationwide — Supreme Court fight may be next. REUTERS/Kent Nishimura
Massive legal blow to Donald Trump: Appeals court strikes down his order to end birthright citizenship, calling it unconstitutional. Ruling blocks enforcement nationwide — Supreme Court fight may be next. REUTERS/Kent Nishimura(REUTERS)

A federal appeals court on Wednesday ruled that President Donald Trump’s executive order aiming to curtail automatic birthright citizenship is unconstitutional, blocking its enforcement nationwide. The decision marks a major legal blow to Trump's immigration agenda and could set the stage for another showdown at the US Supreme Court.

In a 2-1 decision, the San Francisco-based 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals upheld an earlier ruling by a federal judge in Seattle, declaring that Trump’s directive violated the Citizenship Clause of the 14th Amendment.

“The court agrees that the president cannot redefine what it means to be American with the stroke of a pen,” said Washington Attorney General Nick Brown, whose state led the legal challenge.

The executive order had sought to deny US citizenship to children born on American soil unless at least one parent was a US citizen or lawful permanent resident.

Nationwide injunction justified, says court

Despite a recent Supreme Court ruling that curtailed the power of lower courts to issue nationwide injunctions, the 9th Circuit allowed the broader block, saying anything less would fail to protect the four states involved—Washington, Arizona, Illinois, and Oregon.

“It is impossible to avoid this harm absent a uniform application of the citizenship clause throughout the United States,” wrote US Circuit Judge Ronald Gould, who authored the majority opinion.

Gould, joined by Judge Michael Hawkins, argued that limiting the injunction geographically would force states to revise government benefits programs in anticipation of families relocating from areas where the order was active.

Strong dissent from Trump-appointed judge

In a dissenting opinion, Judge Patrick Bumatay, a Trump appointee, contended that the plaintiff states lacked standing to sue and warned that the decision risked "judicial overreach."

What the order tried to do

Trump’s 2019 executive order directed federal agencies to refuse to recognize the US citizenship of children born on US soil to non-citizen parents who lacked green cards or American citizenship.

The Constitution’s Citizenship Clause says: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens…”

First Judge called it 'blatantly unconstitutional'

The case originated from a ruling by Judge John Coughenour, a Reagan appointee in Seattle, who became the first to halt the order.

In his ruling, Coughenour called Trump’s directive “blatantly unconstitutional,” a position now affirmed by the appellate court.

Supreme Court showdown likely

Trump’s legal team could now appeal directly to the Supreme Court or request a broader review by the full 9th Circuit panel.

Also Read | Will Donald Trump destroy Elon Musk’s companies? US President himself answers

Stay updated with the latest Trending, India , World and US news.

Business NewsNewsUs NewsMassive setback for Donald Trump: Appeals court strikes down birthright citizenship order nationwide
More
OPEN IN APP