The U.S. Supreme Court issued a major ruling this week that will significantly limit the power of lower court judges to block a sitting president’s executive actions on a national scale.
In a 6–3 decision, the Court ruled that district court judges do not have the constitutional authority to issue sweeping, nationwide injunctions against presidential executive orders. These types of rulings had become a common tool used by political opponents to grind President Trump’s agenda to a halt—often before his policies even had a chance to take effect.
The decision effectively restores the executive branch’s ability to function without being paralyzed by individual district judges issuing national rulings that exceed their jurisdiction. It’s a landmark clarification of separation of powers—one that President Trump wasted no time responding to.
“GIANT WIN in the United States Supreme Court!” Trump posted on Truth Social shortly after the ruling. “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.”
He also congratulated Attorney General Pam Bondi and Solicitor General John Sauer for their legal leadership and announced a press conference to discuss what the ruling means for his administration going forward.
At that press conference, President Trump laid out several key policies that had been previously blocked by judicial interference. With the Supreme Court’s decision now in place, the administration is poised to act swiftly on several fronts, including:
- Ending birthright citizenship for children of illegal immigrants
- Cutting off federal funding to sanctuary cities
- Halting the use of taxpayer dollars to resettle refugees
- Freezing or redirecting wasteful federal programs
- Banning federal funding for gender-transition surgeries
Many of these policies had been targeted by lawsuits filed by Democrat-led states and advocacy groups. In several cases, lower court judges—many of whom were appointed during the Obama or Clinton administrations—issued universal injunctions that blocked Trump’s executive orders from being enforced nationwide.
Legal scholars across the political spectrum have debated the legitimacy of these universal injunctions for years, with critics arguing they give unelected judges outsized power and encourage forum-shopping, where litigants can choose sympathetic courts to stall federal policy.
This Supreme Court ruling could mark a major shift in how executive authority is exercised and challenged. It places meaningful limits on what individual judges can do and reaffirms the ability of a president to implement national policy without being obstructed by local rulings from coast to coast.
While Democrats and progressive activists have expressed frustration with the Court’s decision, supporters of constitutional governance argue this restores balance among the branches of government and ensures that presidential power isn’t subject to constant judicial veto.
For President Trump, the ruling is not just a legal victory—it’s a green light to get back to work on the America First agenda voters sent him to Washington to carry out.
Watch the full video of President Trump explaining this critical win and outlining what’s next for the country:
? BREAKING: President Trump announces LIST OF POLICIES that were blocked on "nationwide injunctions," but can now PROCEED thanks to SCOTUS.
– Ending birthright citizenship
– Ending funding for sanctuary cities
– Suspending refugee resettlement
– Freezing unnecessary federal… pic.twitter.com/WFzpzxlThw— Eric Daugherty (@EricLDaugh) June 27, 2025