Democrats find loophole, may continue birthright citizenship

Despite the Supreme Court’s ruling that restricted the ability of judges to block President Trump’s policies using nationwide injunctions, a federal court has barred the Trump administration from enforcing his executive order limiting birthright citizenship nationwide.

U.S. District Judge Joseph Laplante in Concord, New Hampshire, made the ruling on July 10 after being asked to grant class action status to a lawsuit filed seeking to represent infants who would not qualify for citizenship under Trump’s directive.

“You might be able to blame Kavanaugh’s concurrence in the CASA decision for this,” BlazeTV host Sara Gonzales comments.

“You look at the CASA decision, and the majority decision from Chief Justice Roberts and Amy Coney Barrett said, ‘Universal injunctions likely exceed the equitable authority that Congress has given to the federal courts.’ However, you had Kavanaugh in his concurrence who left the door open for what the judge is trying to do,” Gonzales explains.

“The decision today will not alter this Court’s traditional role in those matters. Going forward, in the wake of a major new federal statute or executive action, different district courts may enter a slew of preliminary rulings on the legality of that statute or executive action,” Kavanaugh said. “Or alternatively, perhaps a district court (or courts) will grant or deny the functional equivalent of a universal injunction — for example, by granting or denying a preliminary injunction to a putative nationwide class under Rule 23(b)(2).”

“I’m getting in the weeds here, but it matters,” Gonzales says, explaining that “in order to have a judge take class action, you’ve got to have rule 23.”

“It lays out the criteria. Numerosity: So you’ve got a class that’s so big that individual lawsuits are impractical. You’ve got to lump them all together because not doing so would cause too many lawsuits to happen,” she continues.

“Commonality: There are common legal or factual questions among class members. Typicality: The named plaintiff’s claims are typical of the whole class. Adequacy: So the plaintiffs and their attorneys will fairly and accurately protect the interests of the entire class. And then rule 23(b), which, of course, Kavanaugh referenced, is the injunctive relief for that class,” she adds.

Want more from Sara Gonzales?

To enjoy more of Sara’s no-holds-barred take to news and culture, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.