WASHINGTON – For the second consecutive year, the U.S. Supreme Court concluded its term with a significant legal victory for former President Donald Trump. The conservative-leaning court—bolstered by three justices Trump appointed during his first term—ruled to limit the authority of lower court judges to issue nationwide injunctions against presidential policies under legal challenge.
Last year, the Court ruled that former presidents enjoy broad immunity from criminal prosecution, a landmark decision that helped Trump avoid trial for his efforts to overturn the 2020 election. Since then, Trump has seen continued success with emergency appeals that the justices resolve rapidly, without oral argument. These emergency decisions are expected to continue during the Court’s summer recess.
June 27 marked the final day for opinions on major cases argued during the term. Alongside the ruling on birthright citizenship-related injunctions, the Court issued high-profile decisions on issues ranging from LGBTQ+ literature in schools and online pornography restrictions to Obamacare and federal internet subsidies.
Key Highlights from the Final Decisions of the Term:
Supreme Court Limits Nationwide Injunctions Against Trump Policies
In a 6-3 decision authored by Justice Amy Coney Barrett, the Court curtailed the ability of lower federal courts to block presidential policies nationwide. While the case centered on Trump’s controversial birthright citizenship order, the ruling did not address the policy’s constitutionality. Instead, the justices instructed lower courts to reconsider their nationwide blocks within 30 days, declaring such injunctions may exceed the powers granted to federal judges by Congress.
“This was a colossal abuse of power,” Trump said following the ruling. Former Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi, now a close Trump ally, criticized the practice of issuing national injunctions from a handful of jurisdictions, calling it an overreach that the Court’s decision appropriately reined in.
Opponents, including immigration advocates and states that had challenged the birthright order, warned the ruling could lead to legal confusion. The ACLU responded with a nationwide class-action lawsuit aimed at blocking the policy, which it called “cruel and unconstitutional.”
Legal experts suggest the ruling will likely trigger more class-action filings and pressure plaintiffs to expedite cases to reach the Supreme Court, though doing so could delay the implementation of policy challenges.
Amy Coney Barrett Reclaims Conservative Support
Justice Barrett, previously criticized by some Trump supporters for decisions viewed as too moderate, authored the majority opinion in this pivotal case. Earlier this year, she sided with liberal justices in a decision requiring the Trump administration to compensate foreign aid groups for past work—a move that sparked criticism among conservatives.
However, Barrett’s strong language limiting nationwide injunctions won back praise. “I want to thank Justice Barrett who wrote the opinion brilliantly,” Trump said, dismissing concerns that she had ever been a weak link. Conservative commentators also lauded Barrett for skillfully countering Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson’s dissent.
Liberal Justices Decry Court's Direction on Trump's Powers
Not all justices agreed with the direction of the Court. Justice Sonia Sotomayor delivered a pointed dissent, accusing the majority of yielding to Trump’s disregard for constitutional limits. “Rather than stand firm, the Court gives way,” she wrote, calling the decision a “solemn mockery” of constitutional principles.
Justice Elena Kagan, in dissenting from a ruling upholding Texas’s law requiring age verification on pornographic websites, argued the majority failed to adequately weigh First Amendment protections. Sotomayor also dissented in a case allowing parents to opt their children out of lessons featuring LGBTQ+ characters, warning the ruling undermines inclusive public education.
Conservatives Cross Aisle in Obamacare and Broadband Rulings
In two surprising 6-3 decisions, conservative Justices Barrett, John Roberts, and Brett Kavanaugh joined the liberal wing to reject legal challenges from the right.
The Court upheld a provision of the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare), ensuring continued access to preventive services like cancer screenings, HIV-prevention medication, and cholesterol-lowering drugs. It also upheld the legality of a federal program that provides subsidies for broadband and phone service, rejecting claims that Congress had improperly delegated authority to federal agencies.
The remaining conservative justices—Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, and Neil Gorsuch—dissented in both cases.
Court Delays Decision on Louisiana’s Racial Gerrymandering Case
In an unexpected move, the justices deferred a ruling on a high-profile racial gerrymandering case from Louisiana. The Court offered no explanation for the delay, only stating it will provide a timeline “in due course.”
The case involves whether Louisiana can maintain a congressional map drawn to protect powerful incumbents—including House Speaker Mike Johnson—and to comply with a prior court order to create a second majority-Black district. Non-Black voters are challenging the map as racially discriminatory.
The Court's decision will likely influence the balance of power in the House during the 2026 elections.
Conclusion
As it recessed for the summer, the Supreme Court reinforced its conservative tilt, delivering Trump major legal victories while drawing sharp ideological lines in several key cases. The justices will reconvene in October with new challenges ahead, including the unresolved question of the constitutionality of Trump’s birthright citizenship order.
Source: usatoday
Comments
Post a Comment