20 hours ago
Supreme court limits nationwide injunctions: Implications for Donald Trump's birthright citizenship order
In a significant triumph for the Trump administration, the Supreme Court has curtailed the reach of nationwide injunctions against his executive order on birthright citizenship. The 6-3 ruling, divided along ideological lines, limits injunctions to only those states and parties that sued. Justice Barrett emphasized the court's role, while Justice Jackson dissented, warning of threats to the rule of law.
Tired of too many ads?
Remove Ads
US Supereme Court Narrows Judicial Power with 6–3 Ruling
What the Justices Said
Tired of too many ads?
Remove Ads
The Policy at Stake: Birthright Citizenship
FAQs
In a major legal victory for US President Donald Trump's administration, the Supreme Court ruled on Friday that it will limit the power of nationwide injunctions imposed by judges to block his executive order aimed at restricting birthright citizenship, as per a to the NBC report, the court agreed to a request by the Trump administration to narrow the scope of nationwide injunctions imposed by judges so that they apply only to states, groups and individuals that sued, with a 6-3 vote, divided on ideological lines as conservatives where in the majority and liberals in means that the birthright citizenship proposal has the potential to move forward at least in part in the states that challenged it, and also in those that did not challenge it, as per the READ: Pete Hegseth sparks buzz by renaming USNS Harvey Milk after World War II hero Oscar V. Peterson Justice Amy Coney Barrett wrote for the majority, "When a court concludes that the executive branch has acted unlawfully, the answer is not for the court to exceed its power, too," as quoted in the NBC Barrett also highlighted that the nationwide injunctions are limited "only to the extent that the injunctions are broader than necessary," as quoted in the report. She added that the lower courts "shall move expeditiously" to figure out how broad the injunctions can be, as quoted by Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson wrote in dissent that the decision was "an existential threat to the rule of law," as quoted in the report. A fellow liberal Justice Sonia Sotomayor read the summary of her dissent from the bench in the courtroom, saying, "No right is safe in the new legal regime the court creates," as quoted in the NBC READ: Trump channels Xi's China surveillance playbook as ICE deploys facial recognition app to identify people This comes after Trump's executive order, which was signed on his first day back in office in January, proposed a radical reinterpretation of the 14th Amendment, which has guaranteed citizenship to nearly anyone born in the United States, according to the report. But his executive order was immediately challenged, and every court that has ruled on the proposal so far has blocked it, as per amendment says, 'All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States,' but the only exception is people who are the children of diplomats, as quoted by Trump wants to adopt a completely different meaning of the language that would confer citizenship only on those who have at least one parent who is a US citizen or permanent resident, as reported by yet, but it may soon be in some states. The Supreme Court's ruling allows it to move forward where it hasn't been wants to end automatic citizenship for US-born children unless one parent is a citizen or permanent resident, as per the report.
