North Carolina Attorney General Jeff Jackson has secured another legal victory against President Donald Trump, this time concerning a 14th Amendment issue.
On Thursday, U.S. District Judge Leo Sorokin in Boston issued a preliminary injunction against the Trump administration’s policy on birthright citizenship. Jackson joined the lawsuit, originally filed by New Jersey Attorney General Mathew Platkin, making it the fourth ruling in favor of plaintiffs challenging the administration’s stance. Similar rulings have come from judges in Concord, New Hampshire; Greenbelt, Maryland; and Seattle, Washington.
Jackson, a former U.S. Representative, has been actively opposing Trump’s policies through litigation. In just 21 days, he has joined four lawsuits challenging various administration actions, all of which have been granted initial blocks.
In addition to the birthright citizenship case, Jackson has joined:
- A lawsuit with New York Attorney General Letitia James to challenge the freeze of federal grants and funding.
- A case blocking Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency from accessing Treasury Department records.
- A Massachusetts-led lawsuit opposing cuts to National Institutes of Health medical research grants.
The legal challenges highlight the growing partisan divide on immigration and federal policy enforcement. North Carolina, a battleground state, saw Trump defeat Democrat Kamala Harris in the 2024 election by over 183,000 votes, securing 78 of 100 counties. Jackson, however, won his race for attorney general against Republican Dan Bishop by nearly 160,000 votes, prevailing in urban areas despite Bishop carrying 76 counties.
As the Trump administration continues to push its policy agenda, legal battles with Democratic-led states appear far from over. Legal experts predict that the ongoing legal battles between Jackson and the Trump administration could set significant precedents, particularly on immigration and government oversight. With multiple states aligning in opposition to the president’s policies, the Supreme Court may ultimately weigh in on these high-stakes cases, potentially reshaping the legal landscape for years to come.
