Baby 'Nathan' Sues Over Trump's Second Birthright-Citizenship Order — as the Administration Appeals the First Injunction
On Sept. 28, 2026, a coalition of civil rights groups — the ACLU, NAACP, Democracy Defenders Fund, and the Asian Law Caucus — filed Nathan v. Trump, a new challenge to President Trump's August 6, 2026 executive order narrowing birthright citizenship. The lead plaintiff, pseudonymous baby "Nathan," was born after the Supreme Court's earlier birthright-citizenship ruling and after the revised order purported to deny citizenship to children of parents employed by "international organizations."1
The new suit reinforces an existing win: on Sept. 2, U.S. District Judge Deborah L. Boardman (D. Md.) ruled against the second order, writing: "The Supreme Court has spoken: Children in the certified class are 'citizens at birth.'23" Days later, the Trump administration appealed that ruling and immediately moved to dissolve the judge's injunction — a motion that remains pending.
ACLU attorney Cody Wofsy: "The Constitution is clear, and the Supreme Court has been clear: Birthright citizenship is the law of the land. The Trump administration's newest attack on this fundamental American principle is just as cruel and illegal as its previous executive order, and it will meet the same fate in court."
What it means: The administration's second attempt to narrow the citizenship clause by executive order is now fully enmeshed in litigation on two tracks — the government's pending motion to dissolve Boardman's class injunction (plus its appeal), and a fresh class challenge on behalf of children born after the first round of rulings. For now, the courts are holding the line that the August 6 order changes nothing about citizenship at birth; the appeal is the live front to watch.
-
An instance of A constitutional failure to end birthright citizenship forces an executive shift toward collateral enforcement. — Unable to end citizenship at birth outright, the executive pivots to ever-narrower collateral orders that courts keep striking down. ↩︎
-
An instance of Defining the American voter is a power Washington never had. — A second executive order collapses against the same constitutional boundary that citizenship at birth lies beyond federal revision. ↩︎
-
An instance of Literal constitutional text can block even the most aggressive populist executive overreach. — Even a narrowed second executive order collapses against the Fourteenth Amendment's structural text, the constitutional boundary holding twice. ↩︎