The Supreme Court’s conservative supermajority used Trump’s birthright citizenship case to significantly limit federal courts’ power to issue nationwide injunctions against executive policies. The 6-3 decision represents a major victory for conservative legal theories about judicial restraint and separation of powers.
Justice Amy Coney Barrett’s opinion established new precedent restricting how federal judges can respond to potentially illegal government actions. By requiring lower courts to narrow their injunctions, the ruling makes it more difficult for individual judges to block nationwide policy implementation.
The decision affects Trump’s directive to deny citizenship to children born in America unless they have at least one parent who is a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident. This policy would reverse over a century of legal precedent and affect more than 150,000 newborns annually.
Liberal justices expressed serious concerns about the ruling’s broader implications for protecting constitutional rights. Justice Sotomayor warned that limiting judicial authority could enable future administrations to implement clearly illegal policies without effective court intervention, undermining fundamental checks and balances.