Barbara v. Trump, 790 F.Supp.3d 80

Petitioners, using pseudonyms, challenge President Trump’s Executive Order 14160, which limits birthright citizenship based on parents’ immigration status.
The Executive Order would deny U.S. citizenship to children born in the United States if their mother is unlawfully present or temporarily present and the father is not a citizen or lawful permanent resident.
Plaintiffs include families directly impacted by the order: one from Honduras, one from Taiwan (living in Utah), and one from Brazil (living in Florida).
The court provisionally certifies a class of children affected by the Executive Order, rejecting inclusion of parents in the class.
Four district courts, including this one, had previously enjoined the Executive Order; the Supreme Court limited these injunctions and required narrowing their scope.
This case concerns a preliminary injunction and provisional class certification to halt enforcement of the order, and is poised for expedited appellate review.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Constitutionality of EO 14160 under the Fourteenth Amendment	EO violates the Citizenship Clause, contradicting longstanding precedent (Wong Kim Ark)	EO properly interprets "subject to the jurisdiction" as turning on parental domicile/lawfulness	EO likely violates the Fourteenth Amendment; plaintiffs likely to succeed
Class Certification – Scope	Class should include all children denied citizenship plus their parents	Class shouldn't include parents; future persons’ inclusion is overly broad	Court narrows class to children only; certifies class, including future affected children
Irreparable Harm	Denial of citizenship is immediate, irreversible harm to affected children	Harm is speculative as harms are hypothetical or not imminent	Court agrees with plaintiffs; denial of citizenship would cause irreparable harm
Appropriateness of Nationwide Preliminary Injunction	Single injunction needed to protect all class members nationwide	Nationwide class not proper; other courts should handle issues; existing orders may suffice	Court may grant class-wide relief; no barrier to nationwide scope under Rule 23

United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (birthright citizenship under Fourteenth Amendment)
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes, 564 U.S. 338 (requirements for class certification under Rule 23)
Califano v. Yamasaki, 442 U.S. 682 (no geographic limit on scope of class actions under Rule 23)
Nken v. Holder, 556 U.S. 418 (public interest and equities considered together when government is party in injunctive relief)
Winter v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., 555 U.S. 7 (standard for granting preliminary injunction)
Amchem Prods., Inc. v. Windsor, 521 U.S. 591 (proper scope for class actions, especially civil rights claims)