Fact Check: Supreme Court limits lower-court judges' power over presidential orders.

Fact Check: Supreme Court Limits Lower-Court Judges' Power Over Presidential Orders

What We Know

On June 27, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a ruling that significantly limits the ability of lower-court judges to issue nationwide injunctions against presidential orders. The decision was made with a 6-3 vote, effectively curbing the power of federal judges to block executive actions on a broad scale, which has been a common practice in recent years. This ruling is particularly impactful as it allows President Trump to enforce his executive orders, such as the controversial directive on birthright citizenship, even in jurisdictions that have not challenged these orders (New York Times, Reuters).

The ruling specifically states that lower courts can only grant injunctive relief to the plaintiffs involved in a lawsuit, rather than issuing broad injunctions that affect the entire country. This change is seen as a way to restore the separation of powers between the branches of government, according to statements from the White House (White House).

Analysis

The Supreme Court's decision has been met with mixed reactions. Supporters, including members of the Trump administration, argue that the ruling is a necessary correction to what they describe as "rogue, activist judges" who have overstepped their authority by issuing nationwide injunctions that disrupt executive policy (BBC). They claim that this ruling restores the proper balance of power and allows the President to implement the policies for which he was elected.

Conversely, critics, including dissenting Justice Sonia Sotomayor, argue that this ruling poses a significant threat to constitutional rights, particularly for individuals who are not parties to the lawsuits. Sotomayor warned that this could lead to a situation where unlawful policies could be enforced without judicial oversight, undermining the checks and balances that are fundamental to American democracy (NPR).

The ruling's implications extend beyond the immediate context of Trump's presidency. It sets a precedent that could limit the ability of future administrations to face judicial checks on their policies, potentially leading to an expansion of executive power at the expense of judicial oversight (New York Times).

Conclusion

The claim that the Supreme Court has limited lower-court judges' power over presidential orders is True. The Court's recent ruling effectively restricts the ability of federal judges to issue nationwide injunctions, thereby enhancing the power of the presidency and allowing for the enforcement of executive orders that may have been previously blocked by lower courts. This decision has significant implications for the balance of power among the branches of government and the ability of the judiciary to act as a check on executive authority.

Sources

1. How the Supreme Court's Injunction Ruling Expands Trump's Power
2. "A BIG WIN": Supreme Court Ends Excessive Nationwide Injunctions
3. PDF Supreme Court of The United States
4. Supreme Court in birthright case limits judges' power to ...
5. Trump hails 'win' as Supreme Court curbs judges' power to block his orders
6. Supreme Court curbs judges' power to block Trump's ...
7. Supreme Court limits nationwide injunctions in birthright case : NPR
8. The Supreme Court has limited universal injunctions. What ...