President Donald Trump answers questions during a news conference on recent Supreme Court rulings Friday in the briefing room at the White House. (Joe Raedle/Getty Images)
It is not the first legal challenge to the policy. The same group filed a separate suit in January 2025 in the same court on behalf of advocacy organizations with members expecting children who would be denied citizenship under the order. That case led to a ruling protecting members of those groups and is now pending before the 1st Circuit Court of Appeals, with oral arguments scheduled for Aug. 1.
Friday's SCOTUS ruling states that lower courts can no longer block federal policies nationwide unless it’s absolutely necessary to give full relief to the people suing. The decision does not say whether Trump’s birthright citizenship order is legal, but it means the order could take effect in parts of the country while legal challenges continue. The court gave lower courts 30 days to review their existing rulings.
"The applications do not raise — and thus we do not address — the question whether the Executive Order violates the Citizenship Clause or Nationality Act," Justice Amy Coney Barrett said, writing for the majority. "The issue before us is one of remedy: whether, under the Judiciary Act of 1789, federal courts have equitable authority to issue universal injunctions."
"A universal injunction can be justified only as an exercise of equitable authority, yet Congress has granted federal courts no such power," she added.
Members of the media stand in front of the Supreme Court building in Washington, D.C., on the final day of this term on Friday. (Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)
"This executive order directly opposes our Constitution, values, and history," added Devon Chaffee, executive director of the ACLU of New Hampshire. "No politician can ever decide who among those born in our country is worthy of citizenship."
The lawsuit cites the 14th Amendment, which provides that "all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens." It also references the Supreme Court’s 1898 decision in United States v. Wong Kim Ark, which affirmed birthright citizenship for U.S.-born children of noncitizens.
The plaintiffs include individuals from Honduras, Taiwan and Brazil. One mother in New Hampshire is expecting her fourth child and fears the baby will be denied citizenship despite being born in the U.S.
The case is Barbara et al. v. Trump et al., No. 1:25-cv-244, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Hampshire.
"Trump’s executive order directly opposes our Constitution, values, and history and it would create a permanent, multigenerational subclass of people born in the U.S. but who are denied full rights," said SangYeob Kim of the ACLU of New Hampshire in January.
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
"Today’s historic decision delivers a decisive rejection of the weaponized lawfare President Trump has endured from leftist activist judges who attempted to deny the president his constitutional authority," White House spokesperson Liz Huston wrote to Fox News Digital.
"President Trump will continue to implement his America First agenda, and the Trump Administration looks forward to litigating the merits of the birthright citizenship issue to ensure we secure our borders and Make America Safe Again."
Fox News Digital's Breanne Deppisch contributed to this report.
Jasmine is a writer at Fox News Digital and a military spouse. Stories can be sent to jasmine.baehr@fox.com or to @JasmineSBaehr via X.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/aclu-sues-trump-over-birthright-order-supreme-court-clears-path-take-effect