[ad_1]
Confusion and anxiety gripped immigrant communities nationwide after the Supreme Court’s ruling on birthright citizenship, leaving pregnant asylum seekers like Lorena, a 24-year-old Colombian in Houston, fearing her unborn child could become stateless, according to a Reuters report. “I don’t understand it well,” she admitted, voicing concerns that her September-born baby might lack Colombian citizenship if she can’t add the child to her pending asylum case.A pregnant asylum seeker’s fear and the 30-day race for clarityHer panic reflects a broader uncertainty: The court’s 6-3 decision curbed federal judges’ power to issue nationwide injunctions against President Trump’s executive order denying citizenship to babies born to undocumented or temporary-visa holders, but did not rule on the order’s constitutionality.Instead, it triggered a 30-day countdown before the policy could take effect, during which lower courts must reconsider narrower ways to block it. Immigrant advocates reported a surge of calls from distraught parents-to-be, including a visa holder in Ohio terrified his child would be denied rights in a non-plaintiff state. “I don’t want her to be adrift with no nationality,” Lorena said, highlighting the humanitarian crisis brewing beneath all the legal chaos.The ruling’s ambiguity centers on its potential to fracture citizenship rights state-by-state. While Trump’s order remains blocked for plaintiffs like members of Maryland’s CASA and the Asylum Seeker Advocacy Project, it could apply elsewhere after 30 days, creating what experts call an “unworkable patchwork.” For instance, a baby born to undocumented parents in Louisiana (a non-plaintiff state) might be denied citizenship, while an identical birth in Massachusetts (a plaintiff state) would secure it.This disparity could force hospitals to act as de facto immigration enforcers, checking parents’ statuses during childbirth. “Would individual doctors have to figure out how to determine citizenship?” asked Migration Policy Institute analyst Kathleen Bush-Joseph, as per Reuters.Trump, meanwhile, doubled down at a press conference, falsely claiming “hundreds of thousands” exploit birthright citizenship as a migration magnet.In a rapid response, advocacy groups filed class-action lawsuits to shield families nationwide. Within hours of the ruling, CASA and the Asylum Seeker Advocacy Project amended their Maryland lawsuit to seek certification for a nationwide class covering all children born after February 19, 2025, who’d be stripped of citizenship under Trump’s order.”We’re going to get protection for everyone,” vowed lawyer William Powell, arguing class actions could achieve what universal injunctions no longer can. But hurdles persist: Joining these groups requires resources that many lack, and Republican-led states may still enforce the policy during litigation. Betsy, a Virginia teen and CASA member whose undocumented parents migrated from El Salvador, fears targeting “innocent kids who haven’t even been born.”Meanwhile, Democratic attorneys general in 22 states signaled they’ll argue in lower courts that only nationwide injunctions prevent bureaucratic chaos, like tracking parents who cross state lines to give birth. As Honduran asylum seeker Nivida fielded panicked calls from pregnant friends in Louisiana, she echoed a community’s plea: “Is the baby going to be a citizen?” With the Supreme Court likely to revisit the order’s constitutionality this fall, the clock ticks toward a fragmented America.
[ad_2]
Source link
