Free Republic

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...

The Supreme Court unanimously decided on Thursday to limit environmental reviews for major infrastructure projects in a case that will have sweeping impacts on President Donald Trump’s energy agenda. In a move that will restrict power of federal judges, Thursday’s decision reduces the scope of reviews under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) to focus solely on immediate impacts. Under NEPA, federal agencies are required to study any potentially significant environmental consequences of federal permits for infrastructure projects. “NEPA does not allow courts, ‘under the guise of judicial review’ of agency compliance with NEPA, to delay or block agency projects...

During Supreme Court oral arguments in the Trump v. CASA, Washington, and New Jersey cases, Justice Clarence Thomas delivered a surgical takedown of the legal rationale for nationwide injunctions, using just one line.The case centers around whether lower courts can issue sweeping injunctions that block federal policies nationwide, even when only a handful of plaintiffs are before the court. Representing the United States, Solicitor General John Sauer argued that such broad orders violate established legal norms and Supreme Court precedent.“We believe that the best reading of that is what you said in Trump against Hawaii, which is that Wirtz in...