Injunction in Maryland court

On September 2, 2026, U.S. District Judge Deborah Boardman in Greenbelt, Maryland, issued a preliminary injunction halting the Trump administration from enforcing an executive order limiting birthright citizenship. The ruling temporarily blocks federal agencies from taking any action to interfere with, deny, or fail to recognize citizenship for children covered by an ongoing class-action lawsuit. Covered agencies include the U.S. Department of State, the Department of Homeland Security, the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, and the Social Security Administration. The injunction applies to a certified class of children born after February 19, 2025, to undocumented immigrants or temporary residents. Boardman concluded that the revised directive was almost certainly unconstitutional as applied to the certified class.

“No presidential executive order can undo what the Supreme Court has done.”

The Supreme Court precedent

The ruling builds directly on the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Barbara v. Trump, delivered on June 30, 2026. In that case, the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that President Donald Trump's initial 2025 executive order violated the Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The clause confers citizenship on anyone born in the United States who is subject to the jurisdiction thereof, an automatic right that has applied since 1868. Trump's initial order had sought to deny automatic citizenship to children whose parents lacked U.S. citizenship or legal permanent residency, commonly known as a green card. Boardman noted that the high court had already settled the legal status of the certified class, leaving no room for executive modification.

“This Court must, once again, preliminarily enjoin enforcement of the President's most recent attempt to strip the right to citizenship from them.”

Provisions of the August order

Following his defeat at the Supreme Court, Trump signed a revised executive order on August 6, 2026. The new measure narrowed the administration's restrictions by focusing on birth tourism, where foreign mothers travel to the United States to give birth so their children obtain automatic citizenship. The order also sought to bar citizenship for children whose parents work for foreign governments in the country, obtain citizenship through fraud or commercial transactions, or receive classification as alien enemies. The administration defined alien enemies to include members of foreign terrorist groups and drug cartels. Department of Justice lawyers argued that earlier court rulings did not preclude specific, narrow exemptions such as those traditionally applied to foreign diplomats.

Legal challenges and administration response

Immigrant advocacy organizations, including CASA, the Asylum Seeker Advocacy Project, and the Institute for Constitutional Advocacy and Protection, filed for the injunction to protect newborn children. In her 35-page opinion, Boardman wrote that the administration completely misread the Supreme Court majority opinion and adopted a distorted interpretation of its legal limits. She pointed to risks of arbitrary enforcement, citing recent deportation proceedings where officials accused Venezuelan nationals of ties to the Tren de Aragua criminal group without presenting evidence. Shana Khader, legal director of We Are CASA, welcomed the decision, noting that the administration has lost challenges in both district and Supreme Court proceedings. A White House spokesperson criticized the ruling as an attempt by an activist judge to block the president's policies.