Fact Check: Nationwide injunctions against Trump’s policies now severely limited.

Fact Check: Nationwide Injunctions Against Trump’s Policies Now Severely Limited

What We Know

Recent rulings from the U.S. Supreme Court have significantly curtailed the ability of federal judges to issue nationwide injunctions against executive policies. A notable decision in June 2025 established that such injunctions were excessive and represented an overreach of judicial power, thereby restoring a more traditional separation of powers between the branches of government (White House). This ruling has been interpreted as a major victory for the Trump administration, particularly in light of the numerous injunctions that had previously blocked various executive actions during his presidency. Reports indicate that out of approximately 40 nationwide injunctions filed against Trump’s policies in his second term, 35 originated from just five jurisdictions, which were characterized as politically liberal (AP News).

Analysis

The Supreme Court's decision to limit nationwide injunctions is seen as a response to concerns that lower court judges were using these injunctions to effectively nullify executive actions, which they argued undermined the authority of the presidency (New York Times). Legal analysts have noted that this ruling could lead to a significant shift in how federal judges interact with executive policies, particularly those of the Trump administration (Washington Post).

Critics of the ruling argue that limiting nationwide injunctions may hinder the ability of courts to protect rights on a broad scale, especially in cases where immediate harm is evident (AP News). However, supporters, including members of the Trump administration, have hailed it as a necessary correction to what they describe as judicial overreach (White House).

The credibility of the sources discussing this ruling varies. The White House and legal analysts from major news outlets provide a mix of official and expert opinions, while the AP and New York Times offer journalistic coverage that includes a range of perspectives. This diversity of sources helps to provide a more comprehensive understanding of the implications of the Supreme Court's decision.

Conclusion

The claim that nationwide injunctions against Trump’s policies are now severely limited is True. The Supreme Court's ruling has indeed curtailed the power of federal judges to issue such injunctions, which had previously been used extensively to block executive actions. This decision is viewed as a restoration of the balance of power among the branches of government, aligning with the arguments made by the Trump administration regarding judicial overreach.

Fact Check: Nationwide injunctions against Trump’s policies now severely limited.