On June 27, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a significant decision in Trump v. CASA, Inc., addressing the scope of judicial authority in response to challenges against President Trump’s Executive Order 14160.
Summary of Executive Order 14160
The Executive Order, titled Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship, redefines the criteria for birthright citizenship under the Fourteenth Amendment. It directs that individuals born in the United States will not be recognized as U.S. citizens if:
-
Their mother was unlawfully present in the country at the time of birth and the father was neither a U.S. citizen nor a lawful permanent resident; or
-
Their mother was lawfully but only temporarily present (that is, in a nonimmigrant status like F-1, B-2, H-1B), and the father did not hold citizenship or permanent resident status.
This represents a major shift, as for over a century, almost anyone born on U.S. soil has automatically been conferred citizenship at birth regardless of their parents’ immigration or citizenship status.
The Order includes a 30-day ramp-up period for federal agencies to prepare implementation guidance.
Litigation and Appeals to the Supreme Court
In response, multiple lawsuits were filed in Maryland, Washington, and Massachusetts, challenging the Order’s constitutionality under the Fourteenth Amendment and federal statutory law. Each district court issued a universal (nationwide) preliminary injunction blocking the Order’s enforcement. Appeals courts agreed with the district courts, rejecting the Government’s first appeals. The Government then took the case to the U.S. Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court’s CASA Decision
In a consolidated ruling, the Court granted the Government’s request to partially stay the injunctions. It held that universal injunctions—those extending beyond the parties to a lawsuit—exceed the equitable powers conferred on federal courts under the Judiciary Act of 1789. The Court emphasized that injunctions must be limited to affording “complete relief” to the plaintiffs before the court and cannot be applied nationwide absent a certified class. The injunctions remain in effect only to the extent necessary to protect the named plaintiffs, and executive agencies are permitted to issue implementation guidance during the 30-day window.
Looking Ahead
Critically, the Supreme Court did not address the substantive constitutionality of the Executive Order. As it currently stands, anyone born in the U.S. is still recognized as a U.S. citizen. However, this recent ruling could lead to different outcomes, depending on where a child is born. As litigation proceeds in the lower courts, a critical next step will be whether plaintiffs can file class-action lawsuits and seek certification of a nationwide class. Such a class action could potentially restore the nationwide scope of relief if properly certified and maintained.
Further, nothing in the Court’s decision limits the ability of the lower courts to set aside the Executive Order as violative of the Constitution after going through normal litigation. While this decision is disheartening for those who had hoped to see the Order kept on hold, this is not the final word on the Trump Administration’s proposal to significantly limit who becomes a US citizen at birth.
We will continue to monitor these developments closely and provide further updates as the legal challenges evolve.
For More Information
If you have questions about the implications of this ruling or would like to assess how these developments may affect you, please contact our firm.