With Supreme Court Ruling, Another Check on Trump’s Power Fades

The New York Times ^ | June 28, 2025, 5:03 a.m. ET | Charlie Savage

[E. Pluribus Unum]

The court tied the hands of judges at a time when Congress has been cowed and internal executive branch constraints have been steamrolled.

The Supreme Court ruling barring judges from swiftly blocking government actions, even when they may be illegal, is yet another way that checks on executive authority have eroded as President Trump pushes to amass more power.

The decision on Friday, by a vote of 6 to 3, will allow Mr. Trump’s executive order seeking to end birthright citizenship to take effect in some parts of the country — even though every court that has looked at the directive has ruled it unconstitutional. That means some infants born to undocumented immigrants or foreign visitors without green cards can be denied citizenship-affirming documentation like Social Security numbers.

But the diminishing of judicial authority as a potential counterweight to exercises of presidential power carries implications far beyond the issue of citizenship. The Supreme Court is effectively tying the hands of lower-court judges at a time when they are trying to respond to a steady geyser of aggressive executive branch orders and policies.

The ability of district courts to swiftly block Trump administration actions from being enforced in the first place has acted as a rare effective check on his second-term presidency. But generally, the pace of the judicial process is slow and has struggled to keep up. Actions that already took place by the time a court rules them illegal, like shutting down an agency or sending migrants to a foreign prison without due process, can be difficult to unwind.

Presidential power historically goes through ebbs and flows, with fundamental implications for the functioning of the system of checks and balances that defines American-style democracy.

But it has generally been on an upward path since the middle...

[Getready]

Interesting. Maybe we could remove the judge for fomenting insurrection.

[Jim Noble]

they are trying to respond to a steady geyser of aggressive executive branch orders and policies

That's not their job.

[shanover]

Jefferson and Madison would be appalled at these lower judges.

[Lod881019]

The NY Times sounds las sad as half this board when Trump is successful

[MrRelevant]

NYT be hating the Constitution

[fella]

The Judiciary’s ceasing of executive powers is not a check nor a balance. It’s the expansion of the courtroom dictatorship to the entire nation. Something that the writers of the Anti-Federalist Papers warned US about during the 1788-1789 debate on the Constitution.

[cross_bearer_02]

Two words, NYT: CRY MORE!

[frog in a pot]

What BS

Quite right, and we are not buying it.

Unfortunately for us, what may be most important is whether anyone is buying it, and this author has a potential audience - see Clinton's 2016 capture of more votes than Trump.

See also approximately 80% (IMO) of the Dems in our federal government actively working against MAGA. How many Biden-type destabilizing admins can we survive?

It begs the ultimate question, "Is the U.S.'s demise preordained due to its fragile structure?

If so, as the founders warned but did not predict, what can we as individual citizens do to forestall that demise?"

[StAnDeliver]

Let the butthurt flow, Charlie Savage ... but you have a hawt wife ...

[StAnDeliver]

"Charlie is not the wordsmith that “Greenhouse Gas” Greenhouse was."

Charlie's fate is that of Tom Friedman, fat, slovenly, and forgotten...Tommy has morphed into RW Apple -- who had morphed into him just before he passed -- offering national opinion pieces after decades as the restaurant critic, figuring he could do no worse than his frequent eating compantion, Fattyman.

[Jeff Chandler]

Charlie “Silly” Savage.

[Fledermaus]

Boo Hoo

[ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas]

And nothing's got plenty of us.

I got plenty of nuttin

[MikelTackNailer]

[catnipman]

“The court tied the hands of judges at a time when Congress has been cowed and internal executive branch constraints have been steamrolled.”

poor babies ... apparently elections have consequences after all ...

[DoodleBob]

The Slimes must also be peeved at Kagan

Back in 2022, when President Biden was in the White House and conservatives were the ones seeking relief from his executive orders, Kagan was openly skeptical of nationwide injunctions.

“This can’t be right that one district judge can stop a nationwide policy in its tracks and leave it stuck for the years that it takes to go through a normal process,” she said.

That’s not some out-of-context paraphrase—it’s her own words, on the record.

[Albion Wilde]

With Supreme Court Ruling, Another Check on Trump’s Constitutional Presidential Power Fades

Fixed it.

[FenwickBabbitt]

The lefties are so sad their anti-democratic schemes to use activist judges to gradually overturn the previous election are failing.

[FormerFRLurker]

Could this come back to bite us if a Rat gets elected in 2028?

[xzins]

The fact is that immigration, tariff, budget, etc. are all constitutional powers of congress. Same with regulating judges. But congress has handed those powers off. Why? Because they’re totally incapable of responding quickly.