The US Supreme Court has delivered a bombshell ruling that individual judges lack the power to issue nationwide injunctions and block the policies of President Trump or any other administration. The Mail has more.
It was a landmark decision that was seen as a major victory for President Donald Trump in his battle with the judiciary.
Trump has complained about individual judges in any state being able to issue orders against his policies that apply across the country.
It is a ruling that will have far-reaching consequences for those challenging other Trump administration policies in the future.
The court ruled 6-3 in favor of Trump, with all six conservative justices – including the three he appointed – siding with the President.
He wrote on Truth Social: “GIANT WIN in the United States Supreme Court! Even the Birthright Citizenship Hoax has been, indirectly, hit hard. It had to do with the babies of slaves (same year!), not the SCAMMING of our Immigration process.”
The case arose after a battle between Trump and various judges in states far from Washington over his plan to end the right to birthright citizenship.
Trump had issued an executive order that would deny citizenship to US-born children of people who are in the country illegally, and several judges issued injunctions against that.
The Supreme Court justices have now ruled those lower judges did not have the power to block Trump’s policies nationwide.
However, in a complex ruling, the justices did leave open the possibility that Trump’s specific birthright citizenship changes could remain blocked.
Friday’s case stemmed from an executive order Trump signed as soon as he took office that ended birthright citizenship – the legal principle that US citizenship is automatically granted to individuals upon birth.
Under the directive, children born to parents in the United States illegally or on temporary visas would not automatically become citizens, radically altering the interpretation of the Constitution’s 14th Amendment for over 150 years.
The Supreme Court did not rule on the legality of Trump’s order purporting to end birthright citizenship and left open a legal path to challenge it.
Trump claims birthright citizenship was tied to “slavery” and should be immediately dismantled.
“That’s not about tourists coming in and touching a piece of sand and then all of the sudden there’s citizenship, you know they’re a citizen, that is all about slavery,” the President argued.
“If you look at it that way, that case is an easy case to win,” he had previously stated.
The 6-3 Supreme Court decision was written by Justice Amy Coney Barrett.
“Federal courts do not exercise general oversight of the Executive Branch; they resolve cases and controversies consistent with the authority Congress has given them,” she wrote.
However, Trump’s executive order will not go into effect for 30 days, the justices said in their opinion, which allows is legality to be further challenged.
In a concurring opinion with Barrett, Justice Brett Kavanaugh said another way to challenge the executive order is to “ask a court to award preliminary class wide relief that may, for example, be statewide, regionwide or even nationwide”.
But the larger implication of the ruling affects the power of individual judges.
The court’s decision upends the ability of a single federal judge to freeze Presidential policies on a nationwide basis.
Judges have used this powerful and controversial tool to block policies instituted by Democratic and Republican administrations.
The liberal Supreme Court justices disagreed with the ruling.
Worth reading in full.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.