The Supreme Court made a move, intending to unleash one of President Trump’s most controversial policies. But just as the administration prepared to act, a federal judge in New Hampshire has made a cunning counter-move.

sing a different but powerful legal tool, U.S. District Judge Joseph LaPlante has once again frozen the administration’s plan to end automatic birthright citizenship for the children of non-citizens.

The decision sets up an immediate and high-stakes appeal. This is more than just another round in a legal dispute; it’s a direct test of the Supreme Court’s recent authority and a new chapter in the war over the 14th Amendment.

A Nationwide Injunction by Another Name

In a hearing on Thursday, Judge LaPlante announced he was blocking President Trump’s executive order from taking effect. His method is what makes this ruling so significant.

Instead of issuing a nationwide injunction – a tool the Supreme Court sharply curtailed just last month – Judge LaPlante granted “nationwide class certification.”

This legal procedure allows a lawsuit to be brought on behalf of an entire “class” of similarly affected people. In this case, the judge certified a class that includes all infants who would be denied citizenship under the President’s order, no matter where in the United States they are born. By protecting the entire class, the judge’s order has the same practical effect as a nationwide injunction.

The Loophole Left by the High Court

This ruling is a direct answer to the Supreme Court’s last decision. When the high court limited nationwide injunctions on June 27, it effectively told lower court judges they could not act as a national backstop for every person in the country.

However, the justices explicitly left the door open for other legal tools – like class actions – to be used to grant broad relief.

This New Hampshire case is the very first and most significant test of that opening. Lawyers for the ACLU and other immigrant rights groups immediately re-filed their cases as class actions after the Supreme Court’s ruling, hoping for exactly this outcome.

“This ruling is a direct answer to the Supreme Court’s last decision – a strategic legal maneuver designed to use the very tools the high court left on the table.”

‘Irreparable Harm’ and the 14th Amendment

In his reasoning from the bench, Judge LaPlante found that allowing the policy to take effect would cause “irreparable harm” to the infants in the class.

This is a critical legal standard. It means the injury that would be caused – in this case, the deprivation of citizenship – is so severe and fundamental that it could not be fixed later on by a court. The possibility of children being rendered stateless or denied the basic rights of a citizen was deemed too great a risk to allow the policy to proceed, even temporarily.

While not a final ruling on the constitutionality of the President’s order, this finding is deeply rooted in the protections of the Fourteenth Amendment, which for over 150 years has been understood to grant citizenship to those born on U.S. soil.

The Inevitable Appeal

The Trump administration had a clear runway to begin enforcing its policy on July 27, when a 30-day stay issued by the Supreme Court was set to expire. This new ruling has just placed a formidable barrier directly in its path.

The Justice Department is certain to appeal Judge LaPlante’s decision immediately to the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. They will likely also make an emergency request to the Supreme Court to lift this new injunction.

“The administration had a clear runway to begin enforcement on July 27. This ruling has just placed a new, formidable barrier directly in its path.”

This sets up a fascinating new showdown. The Supreme Court will have to confront the immediate consequences of its prior ruling. Did the justices intend for lower courts to use the class-action tool to create the same nationwide effect they had just cautioned against?

A Constitutional Chess Match

The legal maneuvering over birthright citizenship has become a high-stakes chess match between the executive and judicial branches.

The administration is using its executive authority to its fullest extent to reinterpret the Constitution. Its opponents, in turn, are using every procedural tool at their disposal to counter that effort within the courts.

The immediate future of thousands of children who will be born in America now hangs in the balance, caught between a President determined to change the definition of citizenship and a judiciary determined to have the final say.