US President Donald Trump visits a temporary migrant detention centre informally known as “Alligator Alcatraz” in Ochopee, Florida, US on July 1, 2025. — Reuters
TEXAS: The United States Supreme Court has lifted the nationwide injunction that blocked former President Donald Trump’s controversial executive order aiming to end birthright citizenship for children born to undocumented immigrants or temporary visa holders. With a 6-3 ruling, the court has now paved the way for the order to take effect in 28 US states beginning July 27, 2025, Texas among them, while the injunction remains in place in 22 other states where legal challenges were successfully mounted.
Trump’s executive order applies to children born on or after February 19, 2025, whose parents are either in the country without legal documentation or are present on temporary visas. Under the US Constitution’s Fourteenth Amendment, all children born on US soil have historically been granted automatic citizenship regardless of their parents’ legal status. However, the Trump administration reinterpreted that clause, arguing that birthright citizenship should only apply to children born to parents who are in the country legally.
The Supreme Court’s latest decision allows the order to be implemented in the following 28 states: Texas, Florida, Ohio, Georgia, Indiana, Alabama, Tennessee, Kansas, Nebraska, Louisiana, Mississippi, Iowa, North and South Dakota, Montana, Wyoming, Oklahoma, Arizona, Nevada, Utah, Missouri, Arkansas, Alaska, Idaho, West Virginia, North Carolina, Kentucky, and New Mexico. These states either did not challenge the order in court or failed to secure an injunction to block it.
By contrast, 22 states, including California, New York, Washington, Massachusetts, Maryland, Oregon, Michigan, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Colorado, Minnesota, Virginia, Delaware, Rhode Island, Hawaii, Maine, Vermont, New Hampshire, Connecticut, Wisconsin, and the District of Columbia have successfully obtained court orders that temporarily block implementation of the order within their jurisdictions.
According to the Immigrant Legal Resource Centre and the American Civil Liberties Union, the executive order could affect an estimated 150,000 children annually, primarily those born to undocumented or temporarily present parents, including visitors, students, and temporary workers. For these families, the policy poses a potentially devastating shift, as children who are not granted citizenship at birth may face future restrictions on education, healthcare, employment, and legal protection.
While the Supreme Court did not rule on the constitutionality of the executive order itself, legal experts consider the court’s decision a turning point limiting the ability of federal courts to issue nationwide injunctions against executive actions. Still, states and advocacy organisations are not without recourse; they retain the option to file class-action lawsuits. Indeed, new legal challenges have already been initiated in Maryland and New Hampshire aimed at blocking the order more broadly.
The Trump administration has welcomed the decision as a victory for “the rule of law” and the preservation of “presidential authority”. Speaking at a White House press briefing, Trump declared that a “handful of radical leftist judges” had abused nationwide injunctions to obstruct the policies voters elected him to pursue, and that the Supreme Court had now corrected course.
Critics, however, warn that the ruling opens the door to a patchwork definition of citizenship — one that varies from state to state. In a country where citizens are free to move across state lines without borders or passports, such fragmentation could introduce legal and social confusion, deepening divisions in America’s already complex immigration landscape.
Legal scholars emphasise that the issue remains unresolved. In its next session beginning October 2025, the Supreme Court may be asked to consider whether Trump’s executive order directly violates the Fourteenth Amendment. Should the court find it unconstitutional, the policy would be permanently struck down. Conversely, if upheld, the ruling could dramatically alter the landscape of American citizenship law.
‘Alligator Alcatraz’ and a new era of fear
Trump’s return to the political forefront has coincided with a sharp escalation in immigration enforcement and the rise of controversial detention policies. A new high-security detention facility has been established in Florida’s Everglades, in a remote and treacherous swampy region. Trump personally visited the site, announcing that the centre would not only house undocumented immigrants but also US citizens he labelled as “bad people,” declaring, “Some were even born here. I think we ought to get them out too. That might be my next mission.”
Surrounded by snakes, alligators, and impenetrable terrain, the facility has been mockingly dubbed “Alligator Alcatraz” by critics and media outlets. Trump has stated plans to replicate such centres in other states, with a second facility already approved for Florida.
In the wake of the Supreme Court ruling, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) operations have intensified across states enforcing the new policy. In the first five months of 2025, ICE arrested over 71,200 individuals, with 41,600 already deported. A significant number are parents of US-born children who, under the new legal framework, are now denied citizenship. Families are being detained in expanded facilities, often separated, with many children subjected to psychological distress, legal limbo, and a loss of basic rights.
These developments have sent shockwaves through immigrant communities, particularly among Latino, South Asian, and African families. The fear of deportation, family separation, and statelessness has grown palpable.
Civil rights advocates argue that America is now on the brink of a constitutional identity crisis. As Trump rallies supporters around the idea of “citizenship by merit,” others warn that the foundational promise of the American Dream — equal opportunity and protection for all born on US soil — is being dismantled by executive fiat and judicial enablement.
