WASHINGTON - TelAve -- A federal judge in New Hampshire has just approved and then used a tactic to get around the Supreme Court's recent decision designed to stop federal judges from issuing national injunctions to block President Trump's executive orders; a case before the high court involving an executive order aimed at ending birthright citizenship.

U.S. District Judge Joseph Laplante used the Supreme Court's own suggestion that a single judge could block presidential actions throughout the country by permitting plaintiffs to bring their case as a class action lawsuit, says public interest law professor John Banzhaf, who has been called "A King of Class Action Lawsuits," as well as  "a Driving Force Behind the Lawsuits That Have Cost Tobacco Companies Billions of Dollars," and "The Law Professor Who Masterminded Litigation Against the Tobacco Industry."

More on TelAve News

• Colbert Packaging Announces WBENC Recognition
• DivX Empowers Media Enthusiasts with Free Expert Guides for Advanced MP4 Management
• Assent Expands Executive Team to Accelerate Global Growth & Innovation
• The World's Largest Green Economic Revolution Emerges as Nature, Tech, and Finance Converge
• Vinnetwork Unveils Decentralized AI Platform with Vinnetwork(VIN) Token to Challenge Tech Giants' Data Monopoly

The judge agreed to certify  a class-action lawsuit against the administration on behalf of U.S.-born children (or future children) whose automatic citizenship could be jeopardized by the president's executive order.

Class action lawsuits are more difficult to bring than actions brought by only a few plaintiffs, but this decision to both certify the class action and to agree to issue an order blocking a presidential directive shows that it is far from impossible, even in cases such as this where those eligible to represent the class might be reluctant to risk deportation by revealing their identities, says Banzhaf.

Opponents of nationwide injunctions - including both Democrats during Obama's term, and now Republicans under Trump - complained that those seeking to block presidential actions would "judge shop" or "forum shop" by choosing to bring their lawsuits in jurisdictions and before judges most likely to favor their position - e.g. Democrats choosing very liberal judges and Republican choosing very conservative ones.

More on TelAve News

• Centennial Flyers to Become Colorado's First Launch Customer for All-Electric B23 Energic Aircraft
• Pyro Marketing Opens New Digital Marketing Company in Saint Petersburg to Power Growth for Fitness and Ecommerce Brands
• Dr. John Salerno of Salerno Wellness Introduces Their New Full Body Capsule for Advanced LED Light Therapy Patient Treatments
• $14M Expansion Deal with Famed David Lloyd Highlights Rebrand of Sports, Entertainment and Gaming Innovation by AI Driven, Online Fan Engagement Co
• Heartfelt Dreams Foundation Launches Campaign to Build CHD Hospital

This practice is likely to continue when plaintiffs seek to block presidents by having their cases certified as class actions, says Banzhaf, who notes that Congress could help deal with the situation by adopting a variety of techniques: e.g., requiring three-judge courts to issue national injunctions, providing that single-judge national injunctions would not go into effect until upheld by an appellate court, providing for expedited review of national injunctions, etc.

JOHN F. BANZHAF III, B.S.E.E., J.D., Sc.D.
Professor of Public Interest Law Emeritus
George Washington University
"The Man Behind the Ban on Cigarette Commercials"
FAMRI Dr. William Cahan Distinguished Professor
Fellow, World Technology Network
Founder, Action on Smoking and Health (ASH)
Inventor of the "Banzhaf Index"
(202) 994-7229 // (703) 527-8418
http://banzhaf.net/   jbanzhaf3ATgmail.com  @profbanzhaf