Washington, June 27, 2025 – The Supreme Court’s decision to prohibit nationwide injunctions has triggered a political and legal wildfire - especially among those seeking to block Donald Trump’s controversial executive order restricting birthright citizenship. While the president held a press conference to celebrate himself and spoke of a “great week,” lawyers, civil rights organizations, and digital freedom advocates are mobilizing with unprecedented urgency. What was until recently considered a constitutional given - that every child born on U.S. soil is an American citizen - now rests on shaky legal ground. William Powell, an attorney at the Institute for Constitutional Advocacy and Protection, announced on Friday a class action lawsuit targeting Trump’s executive order. The goal, he said, is to protect not only the children of migrant families who have already been born, but also those “who will be born” - as well as their parents. A society-wide lawsuit for the future of America, one could say. The lawsuit is supported by the Asylum Seeker Advocacy Project, among others. Its co-director Conchita Cruz stated that the Supreme Court’s ruling grants birthright citizenship only a 30-day reprieve - during which Trump’s order remains blocked. In this time, “all children born in the U.S. will continue to be recognized as U.S. citizens.” What happens afterward is unclear - and of existential importance to millions of families.
The resistance is not limited to legal scholars. Leading organizations in the Latino community expressed outrage over the court’s ruling. LULAC, Voto Latino, UnidosUS, and the National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials issued a joint warning about the consequences. “This ruling betrays our most fundamental promise - that every child born on American soil is an American, period,” said LULAC President Roman Palomares. He accused the court of sacrificing principle for procedure - and declared that LULAC would not stand by while “children born under our flag are stripped of their rightful place in the nation.” Voto Latino President María Teresa Kumar also spoke of a troubling development. The ruling, she said, strengthens Trump’s administration “in implementing its extreme political agenda” while eroding fundamental rights.
But the issue goes far beyond birthright citizenship. The Supreme Court’s decision to allow age verification for internet content is causing deep concern among digital freedom organizations. Samir Jain of the Center for Democracy & Technology warned, “This ruling burdens not only adults - it threatens decades of precedent under the First Amendment.” The new requirements could severely restrict free speech online - and normalize dangerous intrusions into privacy and data rights. Especially troubling, he said, is the collection and storage of sensitive information like birthdates and biometric data. At the same time, Trump praised another ruling that allows religious parents in Maryland to opt their children out of public school lessons that include LGBTQ+ content. For the ultraconservative organization Alliance Defending Freedom, the decision is a “monumental victory for parental rights.” The government, they argue, cannot force anyone to act against their religious beliefs simply to access public education. Trump himself said the ruling brings “life back to normal” - the control over children, he claimed, has been returned to parents. This is what it sounds like when a president reshapes a country - legally, culturally, and ideologically. The Supreme Court may focus on procedure, but the battle over principles has begun. In a nation where citizenship for newborns becomes a question of political belonging, it is not only the law that is under threat - but the very foundation of democracy itself.
English 
German 
