Hours after the Supreme Court delivered the Trump administration a major victory Friday by ruling lower courts may issue nationwide injunctions only in limited instances, a coalition of liberal legal groups filed a sweeping new class-action lawsuit in New Hampshire federal court. It takes aim at President Donald Trump’s January executive order that redefines who qualifies for U.S. citizenship at birth.

While the justices’ 6-3 ruling leaves open the question of how the ruling will apply to the birthright citizenship order at the heart of the case, Friday’s lawsuit accuses the administration of violating the Constitution by denying citizenship to children born on U.S. soil if their mothers are either unlawfully present or temporarily in the country and their fathers are not U.S. citizens or lawful permanent residents.

The case was brought by the American Civil Liberties Union, ACLU of New Hampshire, ACLU of Maine, ACLU of Massachusetts, Legal Defense Fund, Asian Law Caucus and Democracy Defenders Fund. It seeks to represent a proposed class of children born under the terms of the executive order and their parents.

UPENDING US BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP WOULD HAVE DRASTIC NEGATIVE IMPACT, DEFENDERS WARN

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.

SUPREME COURT TAKES ON BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP: LIBERALS BALK AT TRUMP ARGUMENT TO END NATIONWIDE INJUNCTIONS

President Donald Trump, joined by Attorney General Pam Bondi and Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche, addresses recent Supreme Court rulings with members of the press in the briefing room at the White House Friday in Washington, D.C. (Joe Raedle/Getty Images)

Justice Sonia Sotomayor, in her dissent, suggested plaintiffs could pursue class actions as an alternative.

«Nevertheless, the parents of children covered by the Citizenship Order would be well advised to file promptly class action suits and to request temporary injunctive relief for the putative class pending class certification,» Sotomayor wrote. «For suits challenging policies as blatantly unlawful and harmful as the Citizenship Order, moreover, lower courts would be wise to act swiftly on such requests for relief and to adjudicate the cases as quickly as they can so as to enable this Court’s prompt review.»

The ACLU lawsuit calls birthright citizenship «America’s most fundamental promise» and claims the executive order threatens to create «a permanent, multigenerational subclass» of children denied legal recognition.

«The Supreme Court’s decision did not remotely suggest otherwise, and we are fighting to make sure President Trump cannot trample on the citizenship rights of a single child,» said Cody Wofsy, deputy director of the ACLU’s Immigrants’ Rights Project and lead attorney in the case.

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.

Pedro Urruchurtu spoke to the United Nations Human Rights Council on Friday about what he had endured at the hands of Nicolás Maduro’s regime while being forced to shelter in place for over 400 days. Urruchurtu and four other members of Venezuela’s political opposition were freed in May in a successful U.S. rescue mission.

He and his colleagues were effectively trapped inside the Argentine Embassy in Caracas — where the opposition members fled to, and were sheltered due to the diplomatic status of the embassy. 

The opposition figures were under siege by regime forces who made their lives extremely difficult due to their control of the utilities. Urruchurtu told the council he had endured «five months without electricity, three minutes of water every ten days, rifles pointed at the windows, and dogs trained to bite; only because those in power considered it a crime to direct the campaigns of Maria Corina Machado in the opposition primaries and Edmundo González in the presidential elections. Both won.»

OPINION: AMERICA NEEDS A VENEZUELA DEAL THAT ONLY PRESIDENT TRUMP CAN DELIVER

«Today I am here despite the state, and not thanks to it, because if it were up to it, I would be missing or dead,» Urruchurtu said.

United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Türk told the council that since May 1, 2024, the human rights situation in Venezuela has only gotten worse. The people have experienced «arbitrary detentions, violations of due process and enforced disappearances, amid continued allegations of torture and ill-treatment.»

Türk revealed that his office had documented 32 people — 15 of them adolescents — who reported being tortured and ill-treated in detention. He also noted that 28 people had been subjected to enforced disappearance after the country’s parliamentary elections, which took place in May 2025. He said their whereabouts remain unknown and that at least 12 of them were foreign nationals who «do not have access to consular assistance.»

The Human Rights Council at the United Nations in Geneva, Switzerland, Feb. 26, 2025. (Reuters/Denis Balibouse)

VENEZUELAN OPPOSITION PROMISES REPARATIONS TO LAKEN RILEY’S FAMILY, OTHER VICTIMS OF TREN DE ARAGUA VIOLENCE

«The world must no longer look away from the brutal reality of what the once-beautiful Venezuela has become. Nicolás Maduro and his enforcers are running a criminal narco-terrorist dictatorship that jails political opponents, tortures dissidents, and crushes any hope of free expression. Pedro’s voice today represents the cries of thousands of Venezuelans who remain imprisoned, persecuted or forced into exile, as slaves to the regime,» UN Watch Executive Director Hillel Neuer told Fox News Digital.

Venezuelan opposition members Humberto Villalobos, Omar Gonzalez, Claudia Macero, Magalli Meda and Pedro Urruchurtu Noselli are pictured at the Argentine embassy, in Caracas, Venezuela, where they have sought asylum, after Argentine diplomats were expelled from Venezuela, Aug. 1, 2024. (Reuters/Leonardo Fernandez Viloria )

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced in a post on X on May 6 that the opposition members, including Urruchurtu, had been rescued in «a precise operation» and brought to the U.S. A few weeks later, Rubio met with the released opposition members. State Department spokesperson Tammy Bruce said that Rubio had commended the Venezuelan opposition members for their «bravery in the face of Maduro’s relentless repression and tyranny.»

Neuer also expressed gratitude for the Trump administration and Rubio’s actions, which led to Urruchurtu’s release.

«Thank you to the Trump administration and the Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, for their critical role in securing Pedro’s release and the release of his comrades. Once again, proving that strong, principled diplomacy saves lives and advances the cause of freedom for the world,» Neuer told Fox News Digital.

Negociaciones

Reservas