U.S. Supreme Court Building. WASHINGTON D.C. — The Trump administration is urging the U.S. Supreme Court to allow parts of its controversial restrictions on birthright citizenship to take effect, even as legal challenges continue in lower courts—a move that could carry significant consequences for immigrants from Latin America.
Thursday, Jan. 13, the administration asked the justices, in emergency applications, to narrow lower court orders that have blocked President Donald Trump’s executive order nationwide.
President Trump signed the executive order shortly after the start of his second term. This order would deny U.S. citizenship to children born after Feb. 19 whose parents are in the country illegally.
It also prohibits federal agencies from issuing or recognizing documents that confer citizenship status on those children.
Federal district judges in Maryland, Massachusetts, and Washington have issued injunctions halting the order, citing concerns that it violates the 14th Amendment of the Constitution, which guarantees citizenship to anyone born on U.S. soil—three federal appeals courts have since upheld those decisions.
The Trump administration is now asking the high court to scale back the scope of those rulings, arguing that individual judges should not be able to impose nationwide injunctions.
SEE ALSO: The US-Mexico Border Under Trump: What Trump’s Harsh Immigration Policy Means for the Border’s Crime
Acting Solicitor General Sarah Harris argued in the filings that Trump’s executive order is constitutional, claiming the 14th Amendment’s Citizenship Clause has been misinterpreted to confer birthright citizenship universally.
“Properly read,” Harris wrote, “the clause does not extend citizenship to every individual born in the United States.”
The Justice Department’s position echoes prior arguments made during Trump’s first term, including in the case of the travel ban on several Muslim-majority countries—a policy the Supreme Court eventually upheld. However, it did not address the issue of nationwide injunctions.
SEE ALSO: The U.S. Extends Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for Salvadorans Until September 2026
The justices have not previously ruled on the legitimacy of universal injunctions. However, five conservative court members have voiced skepticism over their broad application.
Harris noted the issue has intensified, telling the court that federal courts issued 15 nationwide injunctions against Trump administration policies in February alone—more than the total number issued during the first three years of President Joe Biden’s term.
This executive order could hit Latin American immigrant communities hard.
An estimated 10.5 to 11 million undocumented immigrants live in the United States. Roughly 70% are from Latin America, with the majority coming from Mexico, followed by Central American countries like El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras.
If the U.S. Supreme Court sides with the Trump Administration, thousands of U.S.-born children could be stripped of their citizenship rights, leaving families in legal limbo and disrupting access to healthcare, education, and legal protections.
Immigration advocates warn that such a change could lead to increased deportation risks and family separations, disproportionately affecting communities already vulnerable to systemic inequities.
Legal experts say the outcome of this Supreme Court case could redefine the interpretation of one of the most fundamental provisions of the Constitution and alter the legal landscape for millions of immigrant families across the country.
