Supreme Court Restricts Federal Judges' Reach, Trump's Policy Under Scrutiny
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled to limit federal judges' authority to grant wide-ranging legal relief, impacting a lawsuit concerning Trump's birthright citizenship policy. The 6-3 decision, led by Justice Barrett, does not permit the policy's immediate enforcement but challenges the scope of universal injunctions issued by lower courts.
The United States Supreme Court issued a significant ruling on Friday, restricting federal judges' ability to provide widespread legal relief in certain cases. The 6-3 decision, authored by Justice Amy Coney Barrett, affects litigation involving President Donald Trump's attempt to limit birthright citizenship. However, the court did not address the constitutionality of the policy itself nor allowed its immediate implementation.
At the crux of the ruling was a request from the Trump administration to narrow the scope of nationwide injunctions in three states—Maryland, Massachusetts, and Washington—that had halted his directive's enforcement. The court determined that Trump's order could not be enacted until 30 days after the ruling. While Trump's directive faces legal scrutiny, the administration argues that federal judges should not issue nationwide injunctions that universally block policies.
The ruling has sparked intense debate among legal experts and policymakers. Justice Sonia Sotomayor, in her dissent, criticized the majority's decision, contending that the executive order is constitutionally flawed. Meanwhile, advocates and opponents alike are gearing up for continued legal battles, highlighted by the ACLU's commitment to challenging the directive's legality.
(With inputs from agencies.)
Google News