Judges keep blocking Trump's policies despite injunction curbs
The Trump administration said it would move quickly to challenge such injunctions. However, the ruling by the court's 6-3 conservative majority contained exceptions, allowing federal judges to continue to issue sweeping rulings blocking key parts of the Republican president's agenda.
In the short time since the ruling, lower-court judges have already blocked Trump's asylum ban at the US-Mexico border, prevented his administration from ending temporary deportation protections for Haitian migrants and forced the government to restore health websites deemed to run afoul of Trump's efforts to squash "gender ideology."
One of the biggest tests of the impact of the Supreme Court's ruling in Trump v. CASA will come on Thursday, when a federal judge in New Hampshire will consider whether to prevent Trump's executive order curtailing birthright citizenship from taking effect nationally on July 27.
That executive order was at the heart of the Supreme Court's ruling, which did not address the legality of the policy, but held that judges likely lack authority to issue universal injunctions and ordered three judges to reconsider rulings blocking the policy nationwide, Reuters observed.
Issued on his first day back in office in January, the order directs federal agencies to refuse to recognize the citizenship of children born in the United States who do not have at least one parent who is an American citizen or lawful permanent resident. The plaintiffs in the New Hampshire birthright citizenship case are looking to seize upon one of the major exceptions to the Supreme Court's ruling. They argue it allows judges to continue to block Trump policies on a nationwide basis in class action lawsuits.
The lawsuit, which was filed by the American Civil Liberties Union and others hours after the Supreme Court ruled, seeks class action status on behalf of babies who would be subject to Trump's executive order and their parents.
The plaintiffs are asking U.S. District Judge Joseph Laplante, who previously issued a more narrow injunction blocking Trump's order, to go further this time by allowing the plaintiffs to sue as a nationwide class and issuing an order blocking Trump's ban from being enforced against members of the class.
At least one other judge has already followed this formula. On July 2, US District Judge Randolph Moss in Washington determined that Trump's denial of asylum to migrants on the southern border exceeded the president's authority. He then certified a class that covered all individuals subject to the presidential proclamation on asylum and issued an injunction to protect the class — effectively a nationwide injunction.
The administration appealed the ruling, which White House aide Stephen Miller called a judge's attempt to "circumvent" the Supreme Court's ruling by recognizing "a protected global 'class' entitled to admission into the United States." "I think there's going to be a lot more class actions," said Lee Gelernt, an attorney with the ACLU, which brought the asylum case.
Class actions must follow what is known as Rule 23, which requires the plaintiffs to meet several elements including proving that the proposed class members suffered the same injury. Conservative Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito warned lower courts against certifying nationwide classes without "scrupulous adherence to the rigors of Rule 23." The process to certify a class can often take months. A senior White House official told Reuters the administration will be watching class certification decisions closely and plans to aggressively challenge them to prevent abuse of the process.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Arabian Post
28 minutes ago
- Arabian Post
U.S. Tariffs Surge Above 20% as Trump Tests Market Limits
U. S. consumers now contend with an effective tariff rate exceeding 20%, marking the steepest level observed since the early 1900s, according to estimates by the International Chamber of Commerce following the latest round of import levies introduced under President Trump's administration. This escalation stems from a newly implemented baseline tariff of 10%, supplemented by selective duties—up to 50% on copper and 200% on pharmaceuticals—pushing the overall rate to unprecedented heights. Andrew Wilson, deputy secretary-general of the ICC, explained that the administration appears to be calibrating tariff levels to maximise revenue without triggering a full-scale market meltdown. Despite wide-ranging rates, Wall Street has shown remarkable composure, a stark contrast to the sharp sell-off experienced in April when the initial import duties were announced. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent confirmed that customs collections have reached approximately $100 billion so far, with projections forecasting up to $300 billion by year-end. Legal and legislative challenges are emerging in response. A federal appeals court struck down the 'Liberation Day' tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, declaring the move exceeded executive authority, though the ruling is presently stayed pending appeal. Meanwhile, Congress is contemplating legislation aimed at curbing unilateral tariff powers, and trade negotiations with major trading partners—namely Japan, the EU, the U. K. and Canada—could moderate or delay certain duties. ADVERTISEMENT Since April, the U. S. has extended tariffs to a broad array of countries. Canada faces a general increase from 25% to 35% on non‑USMCA imports beginning 1 August, with additional duties on steel and aluminium already in place. Meanwhile, Brazil has been targeted with a 50% tariff, linked in part to political tensions, and levels between 25% and 40% are set for nations including Japan, South Korea, Thailand, Malaysia, the Philippines, Sri Lanka, South Africa and others. A hold‑and‑test strategy allows a window until August 1 for targeted trade deals. Market participants have noted this restrained approach: a 10% baseline is broadly absorbed, but steeper duties serve as leverage. The administration appears comfortable testing thresholds before escalating further. Economists caution that importers and consumers will bear the brunt of these changes. A Yale Budget Lab analysis determined that U. S. tariffs to date equate to a 24.6 percentage‑point rise in the average effective rate—potentially reaching 27% absent substitution effects. These duties could elevate consumer prices by roughly 2.9%, reducing household purchasing power by about $4,700 annually. Substitution toward non‑Chinese suppliers later moderates the rate to approximately 18.5%, the highest since 1933. A Harvard Business School study corroborates these dynamics: between March and June, import prices rose ~3%, and domestically produced goods competing with imports increased by ~2% due to elevated component costs and altered supply chains. Similarly, U. S. apparel imports from China fell to the lowest in 22 years in May, as buyers shifted to suppliers in Southeast Asia and Latin America. While equities appear resilient—with the S&P 500 near record highs—analysts warn that bond and currency markets may signal latent stress. UBS expects household and business inventories to help absorb short‑term shocks, but flags a possible 0.7 percentage‑point drag on GDP growth in 2025 if tensions persist. Businesses represented by the ICC, covering some 45 million firms, have voiced concern: 60% of respondents to an ICC pulse survey consider the tariffs negatively, citing cost inflation, supply chain uncertainty and the risk of retaliation as principal worries. Despite this, the ICC insists negotiators must prioritise de‑escalation and multilateral engagement. Secretary‑General John Denton called the policy shift 'a watershed moment in American trade policy' that could inflict systemic harm on the global economy, noting the effective U. S. tariff rate now eclipses levels last seen during the Smoot–Hawley era of the 1930s.
Middle East Eye
2 hours ago
- Middle East Eye
US-backed aid scheme in Gaza hires public relations firm staffed by former Obama, Biden staff: Report
The scandal-plagued Gaza Humanitarian Foundation's military contractor, UG Solutions, has hired the crisis communications firm Seven Letter, which is run by former communications staffers in the Joe Biden and Barack Obama administrations, independent journalist Jack Poulson revealed on Friday. This comes amid the revelation that nearly 800 Palestinians have been killed at GHF aid points in Gaza since it began operations in May, the United Nations said. Eyewitnesses have said both the Israeli forces and American military contractors manning the sites fired on them, and two resignees from UG Solutions confirmed those accounts to the Associated Press. Haaretz has also published testimony from Israeli soldiers who were ordered to fire on aid seekers.
Middle East Eye
2 hours ago
- Middle East Eye
Palestinian man beaten to death by Israeli settlers was US citizen, Arab-American group confirms
The 23-year-old Palestinian who was beaten to death by Israeli settlers near Ramallah in the occupied West Bank on Friday has been confirmed to be a US citizen, according to the American Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee (ADC). "Under the protection of government officials, Israeli settlers lynched a Palestinian American man from Tampa, Florida," a statement issued by the group said. "Saif al-Din Musalat (also reported as Sayfollah Musallet), born in Port Charlotte, Florida, was visiting family for the summer when he was beaten to death while protesting the construction of a new illegal Israeli outpost on village land in al‑Mazra'a ash‑Sharqiya. An ambulance was blocked from reaching him for nearly two hours," the ADC said. "This horrific murder is yet another example of Israel killing American citizens. As of the issuance of this statement, no one has been arrested, no one has been indicted, and—if the past is any guide—no one will be held accountable for the death of Saif," the statement continued. "This is not an aberration; it is part of a well‑documented pattern of impunity enjoyed by Israeli settlers and security forces who routinely attack Palestinians and Palestinian‑Americans under the protection of occupation authorities and indifference of US officials". The killing of US citizens abroad is more often than not addressed by the highest levels of the US government, including a phone call to the victim's family from the president. But now, the ADC said, when "the perpetrators are Israeli settlers or security forces, many US citizens themselves, Washington's response is silence, delay, or repeating the lies of Israeli authorities". "ADC calls on President Donald J. Trump to direct the State Department to open an immediate, American-led investigation into this heinous murder; demand that Israeli authorities arrest and prosecute the perpetrators without delay; and apply standard diplomatic protocol given to any murdered US citizen, including public condemnation of the crime, and regular briefings to Congress until justice is served," the group urged.
