TruthOrFake Logo
TruthOrFake
Fact Check: Supreme Court limits federal judges' power with 6-3 decision.

Fact Check: Supreme Court limits federal judges' power with 6-3 decision.

Published June 28, 2025
ByFactChecker 1.1 avatarFactChecker 1.1
✓
VERDICT
True

# Fact Check: Supreme Court Limits Federal Judges' Power with 6-3 Decision ## What We Know On June 27, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a signific...

Fact Check: Supreme Court Limits Federal Judges' Power with 6-3 Decision

What We Know

On June 27, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a significant ruling that limited the ability of federal judges to issue nationwide injunctions, a powerful legal tool that allowed judges to block executive branch policies across the entire country. This decision was made in a case concerning the Trump administration's executive order aimed at ending birthright citizenship, which automatically grants citizenship to anyone born in the U.S. regardless of their parents' immigration status. The ruling was split along ideological lines, with a 6-3 vote favoring the limitation of federal judges' authority (NPR, NY Times).

The Supreme Court's decision effectively allows the Trump administration to enforce its executive order in states that have not challenged it, creating a potential patchwork of citizenship rules across the country. Legal experts noted that this ruling could lead to a significant increase in individual lawsuits, as individuals would now need to file separate lawsuits to challenge executive actions, rather than relying on a single nationwide injunction (Reuters, Roll Call).

Analysis

The ruling has been described as a "momentous" change in the judicial landscape, as it significantly narrows the scope of federal judges' powers to issue universal injunctions. Amanda Frost, a law professor at the University of Virginia, highlighted that this decision expands executive branch authority while limiting the judiciary's role in checking that power (NPR). Critics, including Senator Chuck Schumer, have expressed concern that this ruling represents a "terrifying step toward authoritarianism," suggesting that it could embolden future presidents to issue unconstitutional executive orders without fear of immediate judicial intervention (NY Times).

The sources cited are credible, with NPR and The New York Times being well-established news organizations known for their thorough reporting. The analysis from legal experts provides additional context, indicating that the ruling could lead to an overwhelmed court system as individuals seek to challenge executive actions through separate lawsuits (Reason).

Conclusion

The claim that the Supreme Court limited federal judges' power with a 6-3 decision is True. The ruling effectively curtails the ability of lower courts to issue nationwide injunctions, thereby enhancing the executive branch's authority while constraining judicial oversight. This decision marks a significant shift in the balance of power between the branches of government, with potential long-term implications for executive actions and judicial authority.

Sources

  1. Supreme Court sides with Trump administration to limit federal judges ...
  2. Supreme Court Limits Judges' Ability to Issue Nationwide Injunctions, a ...
  3. Supreme Court in birthright case limits judges' power to block ...
  4. Supreme Court limits federal courts on 'universal injunctions'
  5. SCOTUS rules 6-3 for Trump, limits 'nationwide injunctions' in ...

Have a claim you want to verify? It's 100% Free!

Our AI-powered fact-checker analyzes claims against thousands of reliable sources and provides evidence-based verdicts in seconds. Completely free with no registration required.

💡 Try:
"Coffee helps you live longer"
✓100% Free
✓No Registration
✓Instant Results

Comments

Leave a comment

Loading comments...

More Fact Checks to Explore

Discover similar claims and stay informed with these related fact-checks

🔍
Partially True
🎯 Similar

Fact Check: Paul Krugman Paul Krugman We’re All Rats Now Time to take a stand, again, against racism Paul Krugman Jun 30, 2025 Zohran Mamdani’s upset victory in New York’s Democratic primary has created panic in MAGAland. Stephen Miller, the architect of Donald Trump’s deportation policies, waxed apocalyptic: Scott Bessent, the Treasury secretary, declared that New York is about to turn into “Caracas on the Hudson.” And Sen. Tommy Tuberville of Alabama basically declared New York’s voters subhuman, saying: These inner-city rats, they live off the federal government. And that’s one reason we’re $37 trillion in debt. And it’s time we find these rats and we send them back home, that are living off the American taxpayers that are working very hard every week to pay taxes. These reactions are vile, and they’re also dishonest. Whatever these men may claim, it’s all about bigotry. Miller isn’t concerned about the state of New York “society.” What bothers him is the idea of nonwhite people having political power. Bessent isn’t really deeply worried about Zamdani’s economic ideas. But he feels free, maybe even obliged, to slander a foreign-born Muslim with language he would never use about a white Christian politician, even if that politician were (like some of his colleagues in the Trump administration) a total crackpot. And while Tuberville stands out even within his caucus as an ignorant fool, his willingness to use dehumanizing language about millions of people shows that raw racism is rapidly becoming mainstream in American politics. Remember, during the campaign both Trump and JD Vance amplified the slanders about Haitians eating pets. And now that they’re in office, you can see the resurgence of raw racism all across Trump administration policies, large and small. You can see it, for example, in the cuts at the National Institutes of Health, which are so tilted against racial minorities that a federal judge — one appointed by Ronald Reagan! — declared I’ve never seen a record where racial discrimination was so palpable. I’ve sat on this bench now for 40 years. I’ve never seen government racial discrimination like this. You can see it in the renaming of military bases after Confederate generals — that is, traitors who fought for slavery. You can even see it in a change in the military’s shaving policy that is clearly custom-designed to drive Black men — who account for around a quarter of the Army’s new recruits — out of the service. So racism and bigotry are back, big time. Who’s safe? Nobody. Are you a legal immigrant? Well, the Supreme Court just allowed Trump to summarily strip half a million U.S. residents of that status, and only a fool would imagine that this is the end of the story. Anyway, when masked men who claim to be ICE agents but refuse to show identification are grabbing people off the streets because they think those people look illegal, does legal status even matter? Does it even matter if you’re a U.S. citizen? And the One Big Beautiful Bill Act is set to massively increase ICE’s funding — basically setting up a huge national secret police force. Now, maybe you imagine that you yourself won’t suffer from this new reign of bigotry and imagine that everyone you care about is similarly safe. But if that’s what you think, you’re likely to face a rude awakening. I personally don’t have any illusions of safety. Yes, I’m a native-born white citizen. But my wife and her family are Black, and some of my friends and relatives are foreign-born U.S. citizens. Furthermore, I’m Jewish, and anyone who knows their history realizes that whenever right-wing bigotry is on the ascendant, we’re always next in line. Are there really people out there naïve enough to believe MAGA’s claims to be against antisemitism, who can’t see the transparent cynicism and dishonesty? The fact is that the Trump administration already contains a number of figures with strong ties to antisemitic extremists. The Great Replacement Theory, which has de facto become part of MAGA’s ideology, doesn’t just say that there’s a conspiracy to replace whites with people of color; it says that it’s a Jewish conspiracy. So I’m definitely scared of what the many antisemites inside or with close ties to the Trump administration may eventually do. And no, I’m not frightened at all by the prospect that New York may soon have a somewhat leftist Muslim mayor. Anyway, my personal fears are beside the point. Everyone who cares about keeping America America needs to take a stand against the resurgence of bigotry. Because the truth is that we’re all rats now. MUSICAL CODA Discussion about this post Michael Roseman Jun 30 Edited For a while, American bigotry was ashamed of itself. Or pretended to be. Now it runs the government. Reply Share 106 replies Megan Rothery Jun 30 Edited Take a stand - Call. Write. Email. Protest. Unrelentingly. Use/share this spreadsheet as a resource to call/email/write members of Congress, the Cabinet and news organizations. Reach out to those in your own state, as well as those in others. Use your voice and make some “good trouble” ❤️‍🩹🤍💙 https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/13lYafj0P-6owAJcH-5_xcpcRvMUZI7rkBPW-Ma9e7hw/edit?usp=drivesdk Reply Share 31 replies 852 more comments... No posts Ready for more? © 2025 Paul Krugman Privacy ∙ Terms ∙ Collection notice Start writing Get the app Substack is the home for great culture

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Paul Krugman Paul Krugman We’re All Rats Now Time to take a stand, again, against racism Paul Krugman Jun 30, 2025 Zohran Mamdani’s upset victory in New York’s Democratic primary has created panic in MAGAland. Stephen Miller, the architect of Donald Trump’s deportation policies, waxed apocalyptic: Scott Bessent, the Treasury secretary, declared that New York is about to turn into “Caracas on the Hudson.” And Sen. Tommy Tuberville of Alabama basically declared New York’s voters subhuman, saying: These inner-city rats, they live off the federal government. And that’s one reason we’re $37 trillion in debt. And it’s time we find these rats and we send them back home, that are living off the American taxpayers that are working very hard every week to pay taxes. These reactions are vile, and they’re also dishonest. Whatever these men may claim, it’s all about bigotry. Miller isn’t concerned about the state of New York “society.” What bothers him is the idea of nonwhite people having political power. Bessent isn’t really deeply worried about Zamdani’s economic ideas. But he feels free, maybe even obliged, to slander a foreign-born Muslim with language he would never use about a white Christian politician, even if that politician were (like some of his colleagues in the Trump administration) a total crackpot. And while Tuberville stands out even within his caucus as an ignorant fool, his willingness to use dehumanizing language about millions of people shows that raw racism is rapidly becoming mainstream in American politics. Remember, during the campaign both Trump and JD Vance amplified the slanders about Haitians eating pets. And now that they’re in office, you can see the resurgence of raw racism all across Trump administration policies, large and small. You can see it, for example, in the cuts at the National Institutes of Health, which are so tilted against racial minorities that a federal judge — one appointed by Ronald Reagan! — declared I’ve never seen a record where racial discrimination was so palpable. I’ve sat on this bench now for 40 years. I’ve never seen government racial discrimination like this. You can see it in the renaming of military bases after Confederate generals — that is, traitors who fought for slavery. You can even see it in a change in the military’s shaving policy that is clearly custom-designed to drive Black men — who account for around a quarter of the Army’s new recruits — out of the service. So racism and bigotry are back, big time. Who’s safe? Nobody. Are you a legal immigrant? Well, the Supreme Court just allowed Trump to summarily strip half a million U.S. residents of that status, and only a fool would imagine that this is the end of the story. Anyway, when masked men who claim to be ICE agents but refuse to show identification are grabbing people off the streets because they think those people look illegal, does legal status even matter? Does it even matter if you’re a U.S. citizen? And the One Big Beautiful Bill Act is set to massively increase ICE’s funding — basically setting up a huge national secret police force. Now, maybe you imagine that you yourself won’t suffer from this new reign of bigotry and imagine that everyone you care about is similarly safe. But if that’s what you think, you’re likely to face a rude awakening. I personally don’t have any illusions of safety. Yes, I’m a native-born white citizen. But my wife and her family are Black, and some of my friends and relatives are foreign-born U.S. citizens. Furthermore, I’m Jewish, and anyone who knows their history realizes that whenever right-wing bigotry is on the ascendant, we’re always next in line. Are there really people out there naïve enough to believe MAGA’s claims to be against antisemitism, who can’t see the transparent cynicism and dishonesty? The fact is that the Trump administration already contains a number of figures with strong ties to antisemitic extremists. The Great Replacement Theory, which has de facto become part of MAGA’s ideology, doesn’t just say that there’s a conspiracy to replace whites with people of color; it says that it’s a Jewish conspiracy. So I’m definitely scared of what the many antisemites inside or with close ties to the Trump administration may eventually do. And no, I’m not frightened at all by the prospect that New York may soon have a somewhat leftist Muslim mayor. Anyway, my personal fears are beside the point. Everyone who cares about keeping America America needs to take a stand against the resurgence of bigotry. Because the truth is that we’re all rats now. MUSICAL CODA Discussion about this post Michael Roseman Jun 30 Edited For a while, American bigotry was ashamed of itself. Or pretended to be. Now it runs the government. Reply Share 106 replies Megan Rothery Jun 30 Edited Take a stand - Call. Write. Email. Protest. Unrelentingly. Use/share this spreadsheet as a resource to call/email/write members of Congress, the Cabinet and news organizations. Reach out to those in your own state, as well as those in others. Use your voice and make some “good trouble” ❤️‍🩹🤍💙 https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/13lYafj0P-6owAJcH-5_xcpcRvMUZI7rkBPW-Ma9e7hw/edit?usp=drivesdk Reply Share 31 replies 852 more comments... No posts Ready for more? © 2025 Paul Krugman Privacy ∙ Terms ∙ Collection notice Start writing Get the app Substack is the home for great culture

Jul 20, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: Federal district judges are overruling the Supreme Court's authority.
False
🎯 Similar

Fact Check: Federal district judges are overruling the Supreme Court's authority.

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Federal district judges are overruling the Supreme Court's authority.

Jul 5, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: Roe v. Wade was a landmark Supreme Court decision on abortion rights.
True
🎯 Similar

Fact Check: Roe v. Wade was a landmark Supreme Court decision on abortion rights.

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Roe v. Wade was a landmark Supreme Court decision on abortion rights.

Jul 3, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: Roe v. Wade was a landmark Supreme Court decision in 1973.
True

Fact Check: Roe v. Wade was a landmark Supreme Court decision in 1973.

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Roe v. Wade was a landmark Supreme Court decision in 1973.

Jul 3, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: The Supreme Court can issue rulings that affect federal policies nationwide.
True

Fact Check: The Supreme Court can issue rulings that affect federal policies nationwide.

Detailed fact-check analysis of: The Supreme Court can issue rulings that affect federal policies nationwide.

Jul 3, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: The Supreme Court's decision to permit executive violations is an existential threat to law.
Partially True

Fact Check: The Supreme Court's decision to permit executive violations is an existential threat to law.

Detailed fact-check analysis of: The Supreme Court's decision to permit executive violations is an existential threat to law.

Jul 11, 2025
Read more →
Explore All Fact Checks