>> Continued From the Previous Page <<
What makes this ruling even more outrageous is its timing. Just days earlier, the U.S. Supreme Court had explicitly limited the power of lower courts to issue sweeping nationwide injunctions against presidential actions. In a 6–3 landmark decision issued on June 27, the Court ruled that federal judges do not have constitutional or statutory authority to block federal policies across the entire country.
The ruling was seen as a victory for the Trump administration and a much-needed check on judicial activism. It meant that Trump’s executive order should go into effect on July 27, without interference. But just hours after the Supreme Court ruling dropped, the ACLU rushed to file suit—clearly hoping to find a friendly judge to do what the highest court just said couldn’t be done. And Laplante was more than willing to oblige.
At the heart of this controversy is Trump’s effort to bring constitutional sanity back to the interpretation of the 14th Amendment. For decades, liberal courts and politicians have twisted the original intent of the amendment, handing out U.S. citizenship like candy to the children of people who enter the country illegally.
Trump has had enough. His executive order clearly lays out the federal government’s position:
“It is the policy of the United States that no department or agency of the United States government shall issue documents recognizing United States citizenship, or accept documents issued by State, local, or other governments or authorities purporting to recognize United States citizenship, to persons: (1) when that person’s mother was unlawfully present in the United States and the person’s father was not a United States citizen or lawful permanent resident at the time of said person’s birth, or (2) when that person’s mother’s presence in the United States was lawful but temporary, and the person’s father was not a United States citizen or lawful permanent resident at the time of said person’s birth.”
In other words, no more automatic citizenship for children born to illegal aliens or temporary visitors—exactly what the 14th Amendment’s framers intended. Trump’s order goes further, reminding the public of the original meaning:
“[The] Fourteenth Amendment has never been interpreted to extend citizenship universally to everyone born within the United States. The Fourteenth Amendment has always excluded from birthright citizenship persons who were born in the United States but not ‘subject to the jurisdiction thereof.’ Consistent with this understanding, the Congress has further specified through legislation that ‘a person born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof’ is a national and citizen of the United States at birth, 8 U.S.C. 1401, generally mirroring the Fourteenth Amendment’s text,” the order reads.
This is exactly the kind of constitutional reset that millions of Americans have demanded. Yet once again, the activist bench is attempting to override the will of the people and a president trying to restore law and order.
The fight is far from over. With the Supreme Court’s ruling on nationwide injunctions now on the books, the Trump administration is expected to challenge Judge Laplante’s decision. And rightly so—judges who ignore the law and side with illegal immigration should be held accountable.
As the July 27 implementation date approaches, the nation is watching. Will President Trump’s common-sense order prevail, or will another rogue judge succeed in trampling both constitutional authority and American sovereignty?
