US Supreme Court Rules Judges Can’t Stop Trump’s Bid To End Birthright Citizenship

On Friday, June 27, the United States Supreme Court issued a major victory for former President Donald Trump by restricting the power of federal district judges to impose nationwide injunctions against executive actions.

In a 6-3 ruling, the court determined that such broad judicial orders “likely exceed the equitable authority that Congress has granted to federal courts.” The case originated from a challenge to Trump’s executive order aiming to terminate birthright citizenship for children born on U.S. soil to non-citizen parents.

Although the Court did not directly address the constitutionality of Trump’s birthright citizenship order, the broader ruling significantly strengthens presidential authority by making it harder for individual judges to halt executive policies across the nation.

Justice Amy Coney Barrett, writing for the majority, underscored that the judiciary’s role is not to oversee the executive branch. “Federal courts do not exercise general oversight of the Executive Branch; they resolve cases and controversies consistent with the authority Congress has given them,” Barrett wrote. “When a court concludes that the Executive Branch has acted unlawfully, the answer is not for the court to exceed its power, too.”

The decision, supported by the court’s five other conservative justices, prompted a strong dissent from the three liberal justices, who cautioned that the ruling undermines judicial checks on executive overreach.

The legal dispute focused not on the substance of Trump’s immigration policy, but on whether a single district judge could issue a nationwide block on a presidential directive during a pending legal challenge. The ruling marks a shift from recent years, when courts frequently used national injunctions to stop presidential actions.

Trump’s executive order, issued on his first day in office, stated that children born in the U.S. to undocumented immigrants or those on temporary visas would not automatically receive citizenship. Lower courts in Maryland, Massachusetts, and Washington state had deemed the order unconstitutional, citing the 14th Amendment, which states: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States.”

The Supreme Court’s decision comes amid growing conservative criticism of nationwide injunctions. Justice Samuel Alito described them as a “practical problem,” pointing out that hundreds of district judges could each act independently. Solicitor General John Sauer compared the injunctions to a “nuclear weapon,” arguing they disrupt the constitutional balance of power.

While previous administrations have also faced judicial conflicts over national injunctions, Trump has encountered a historically high number of them, far exceeding those faced by his successor, Joe Biden, over a longer period.

The ruling is anticipated to have lasting implications for executive authority and how future presidents, regardless of party, address legal challenges to their policies.

A Gentle Reminder: Every obstacle is a stepping stone, every morning; a chance to go again, and those little steps take you closer to your dream.

Nnamdi Okoli