Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

SCOTUS Limits Federal Judges’ Ability to Block Executive Actions Nationwide
Democracy Docket ^ | 06/27/2025 | Jacob Knutson

Posted on 06/27/2025 7:35:35 AM PDT by DFG

In a sweeping ruling, the Supreme Court limited the ability of federal judges to block executive actions throughout the country through nationwide injunctions, greatly affecting how parties seek judicial relief going forward.

The court’s 6-3 ruling Friday, with all six GOP-appointed justices in the majority, deals a significant blow to legal challenges against President Donald Trump’s extreme executive orders and other actions, many of which have been blocked or temporarily put on hold through nationwide injunctions.

Nationwide, or universal, injunctions prevent the government from enforcing a law, regulation, or policy across the entire U.S. — not just against the specific parties involved in the lawsuit, and not just in the districts where they’re issued.

Friday’s decision was over Trump’s executive order aiming to deny citizenship to children who are born on U.S. soil to parents who are in the country illegally or temporarily. His order directly challenged the 14th Amendment, which states that everyone born on U.S. territory is a citizen, regardless of their descent.

In a majority opinion written by Justice Amy Coney Barrett, the court said nationwide injunctions “likely exceed the equitable authority that Congress has given to federal courts.”

The court’s ruling does not address the underlying constitutionality and merits of Trump’s order. It instead stayed nationwide injunctions issued by federal judges in Maryland, Massachusetts and New Hampshire.

The orders prevented federal agencies from carrying out Trump’s birthright citizenship order anywhere in the country. The Department of Justice (DOJ) challenged the orders by asking the Supreme Court in an emergency application whether judges can grant relief that applies to parties who are not litigating before them.

(Excerpt) Read more at democracydocket.com ...


TOPICS: Politics/Elections; US: Maryland; US: Massachusetts; US: New Hampshire
KEYWORDS: 14thamendment; anchorbabies; citizenship; demagogicparty; illegalimmigration; injunctions; judicialoverreach; lawfare; maga; nationwideinjunction; scotus; universalinjunction; winning
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-36 next last

1 posted on 06/27/2025 7:35:35 AM PDT by DFG
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: DFG

“The court’s 6-3 ruling Friday, with all six GOP-appointed justices in the majority, deals a significant blow to legal challenges against President Donald Trump’s extreme executive orders and other actions...”


No bias there.


2 posted on 06/27/2025 7:40:38 AM PDT by Ken H (Trump 2024)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DFG

Yeaaaaa!
Amy Conehead finally gets one right.
She’s not from France, but claims to be a Cajun of French descent...


3 posted on 06/27/2025 7:40:41 AM PDT by Dr. Franklin ("A republic, if you can keep it." )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DFG
His order directly challenged the 14th Amendment, which states that everyone born on U.S. territory is a citizen, regardless of their descent.

No, Trump's order does not challenge the 14th Amendment, but rather enforces it by giving meaning to the phrase "and subject to the jurisdiction thereof." It is telling that the author paraphrases the amendment rather than quoting it directly.

4 posted on 06/27/2025 7:40:51 AM PDT by Petrosius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DFG

“His order directly challenged the 14th Amendment, which states that everyone born on U.S. territory is a citizen, regardless of their descent.”

The 14th Amendment does not state that.

It states:

“All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. “

The key being “subject to the jurisdiction thereof”. Only children of citizens and green-card permanent residents are automatically citizens.


5 posted on 06/27/2025 7:44:35 AM PDT by MeanWestTexan (Sometimes There Is No Lesser Of Two Evils)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DFG
Amy is FINALLY using her BRAIN instead of her female parts.

Amy....stay FAR AWAY FROM THOSE DUMBASS SISTERS!! THEY WILL BRING YOU DOWN!!

6 posted on 06/27/2025 7:44:49 AM PDT by Ann Archy (Abortion.....the HUMAN Sacrifice to the god of Convenience.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DFG

Now when a district court Democrat issues an injunction, a hundred others will pop up and mimic her.


7 posted on 06/27/2025 7:45:49 AM PDT by Jeff Chandler (The issue is never the issue. The issue is always the revolution.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Petrosius

THIS HAS TO GET SETTLED ONCE & FOR ALL


8 posted on 06/27/2025 7:47:19 AM PDT by ridesthemiles (not giving up on TRUMP---EVER)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: DFG
YouTube from Fox:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WDMYVSVJXcQ

9 posted on 06/27/2025 7:47:46 AM PDT by SmokingJoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DFG

“... the 14th Amendment, which states that everyone born on U.S. territory is a citizen, regardless of their descent.”

INCORRECT:

“All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.”

THE KEY PHRASE THAT EVERYONE IGNORES IS:

“AND subject to the jurisdiction thereof, “..................


10 posted on 06/27/2025 7:47:47 AM PDT by Red Badger (Homeless veterans camp in the streets while illegals are put up in 5 Star hotels....................)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Chandler

How so?


11 posted on 06/27/2025 7:49:27 AM PDT by SmokingJoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Franklin

Meps!


12 posted on 06/27/2025 7:49:39 AM PDT by HerrBlucher
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: DFG

To be clear.

This Supreme Court decision does not say anything about the legality of birthright citizenship.

What it does say, is that there are limits to district judges issuing nationwide injuctions against presidential executive orders.

It means that current injunctions that were filed against Trump’s EO have been partially stayed, so Trump’s EO now should apply nationwide

However, Trump will need to take the determination of what was meant in the 14th Amendment and birthright citizenship back to the Supreme Court again, for a final determination.

I don’t know what this means yet, for instance, for all the babies that have been born during this time period the district judges had issued their nationwide injunctions.


13 posted on 06/27/2025 7:54:41 AM PDT by backpacker_c
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SmokingJoe

All the Rats have to do is find one anchor baby in each district. “A hundred” is rhetorical, not a verified count.


14 posted on 06/27/2025 7:57:38 AM PDT by Jeff Chandler (The issue is never the issue. The issue is always the revolution.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: DFG
The court's ruling does not address the underlying constitutionality and merits of Trump's order...

The stupid F'n media still doesn't get it.

15 posted on 06/27/2025 7:58:21 AM PDT by skimbell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Chandler
This new SCOTUS ruling is going to make it much harder for Democrats to pull such a stunt.
16 posted on 06/27/2025 8:01:59 AM PDT by SmokingJoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Franklin
Amy Conehead finally gets one right.

Yes, she gets "one right".

How about arguing the law for decisions she believe was wrong on? That you make that comment you did suggests you're ignorant in that area and thus resort to the "Conehead finally" comment.

17 posted on 06/27/2025 8:05:01 AM PDT by Fury
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: SmokingJoe
...much harder for Democrats to pull such a stunt.

Actually for Democrats and Republicans. It's gone on for too long as it is regardless of party.

18 posted on 06/27/2025 8:06:02 AM PDT by Fury
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: skimbell

lol...

the source in this thread, is a site created by mark elias... the leftist lawyer who worked for clinton, created and pushed the russian dossier and collusion with Trump, and multiple lawsuits against Trump


19 posted on 06/27/2025 8:06:51 AM PDT by backpacker_c
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Fury
How about arguing the law for decisions she believe was wrong on?

How about writing coherent sentences?

That you make that comment you did suggests you're ignorant in that area and thus resort to the "Conehead finally" comment.

How much are you willing to pay me for my time? My hourly rate is high.
20 posted on 06/27/2025 8:08:34 AM PDT by Dr. Franklin ("A republic, if you can keep it." )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-36 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson