Fact Check: Nationwide Injunctions Against Presidents Are a Recent, Unprecedented Practice
What We Know
The claim that nationwide injunctions against presidents are a recent and unprecedented practice has some basis in fact, but it requires nuance. Historically, nationwide injunctions were quite rare. According to a report by the Congressional Research Service, only 27 universal injunctions were issued before the 21st century, and they have become more common in recent decades, particularly during the Trump administration, which faced an unprecedented number of such injunctions (source-1). In fact, President Trump incurred the most nationwide injunctions in American history, with 40 filed against his executive actions during his second term, predominantly from five jurisdictions (source-2).
The practice of issuing nationwide injunctions has been criticized by legal scholars and politicians alike, who argue that it undermines the separation of powers and allows a single judge to halt national policies (source-3). Notably, the Supreme Court has recently taken steps to limit the use of these injunctions, indicating a shift in judicial practice (source-6).
Analysis
The evidence suggests that while nationwide injunctions have been utilized more frequently in recent years, particularly against President Trump, the practice itself is not entirely new. The assertion that it is "unprecedented" overlooks the fact that there were instances of nationwide injunctions prior to the Trump administration, albeit in much smaller numbers. For example, during the presidencies of George W. Bush and Barack Obama, several nationwide injunctions were also issued, although they were significantly fewer in comparison (source-1).
The sources discussing the rise of nationwide injunctions during the Trump presidency are credible and reflect a consensus among legal scholars regarding the increasing frequency of such rulings. However, the framing of the issue as entirely unprecedented may be misleading. The Supreme Court's recent decision to limit the use of nationwide injunctions indicates a recognition of the potential overreach by lower courts, which has been a point of contention in legal discussions (source-2).
Conclusion
The claim that nationwide injunctions against presidents are a recent and unprecedented practice is Partially True. While it is accurate that the frequency of these injunctions has increased significantly in recent years, particularly during the Trump administration, the practice itself is not entirely new. There have been instances of nationwide injunctions prior to this period, albeit far fewer. Therefore, while the trend is notable and raises important legal questions, it does not represent a complete departure from historical judicial practices.
Sources
- Nationwide Injunctions in the First Hundred Days of ... Congress.gov
- “A BIG WIN”: Supreme Court Ends Excessive Nationwide ... White House
- As President Trump Faces an Unprecedented Number of ... Senate Republicans
- Nationwide Injunctions Under the First Trump ... Congress.gov
- Facebook Lite à télécharger - ZDNet ZDNet
- The impact of Supreme Court's decision on nationwide ... YouTube
- Recuperar contraseña de Facebook: con y sin correo o número CCM
- Descargar Facebook Lite gratis para Android APK - CCM CCM
