Fact Check: Supreme Court ruling may not significantly limit litigants' rights.

Published June 28, 2025

•By

VERDICT

Partially True

# Fact Check: "Supreme Court ruling may not significantly limit litigants' rights." ## What We Know On June 27, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a...

Fact Check: "Supreme Court ruling may not significantly limit litigants' rights."

What We Know

On June 27, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a ruling that significantly curtails the ability of federal judges to issue universal injunctions, which are court orders that prevent the government from enforcing laws or policies against anyone, not just the plaintiffs in a case. This ruling is seen as a major victory for the Trump administration, as it allows for greater executive flexibility in implementing policies without the risk of nationwide injunctions blocking them (source-2, source-3). The Court stated that universal injunctions likely exceed the equitable authority granted to federal courts by Congress (source-1).

Historically, universal injunctions have been used more frequently over the past decade, particularly to challenge executive actions from various administrations. The ruling suggests that federal courts will now have limited authority to issue such injunctions, which could lead to fewer barriers for executive actions (source-4).

Analysis

The claim that the Supreme Court ruling may not significantly limit litigants' rights can be evaluated from multiple angles. On one hand, the ruling does indeed restrict the ability of litigants to seek broad relief through universal injunctions, which can be seen as a limitation on their rights to challenge government actions effectively. The Court's decision indicates that federal judges will have less power to issue nationwide injunctions, which previously allowed them to halt policies that they deemed unjust or unconstitutional (source-3).

However, the ruling does not eliminate all avenues for litigants to challenge government actions. They can still pursue cases in individual jurisdictions, and courts can still issue injunctions that apply to specific plaintiffs. This means that while the scope of relief may be narrower, litigants still retain some rights to seek redress in court (source-7).

The reliability of the sources used in this analysis is high, as they include major news outlets and official court documents. However, there may be a slight bias in how the ruling is portrayed, particularly from sources that may align with political perspectives that favor or oppose the Trump administration (source-2, source-4).

Conclusion

The verdict on the claim that "Supreme Court ruling may not significantly limit litigants' rights" is Partially True. While the ruling does impose significant restrictions on the ability of litigants to obtain universal injunctions, it does not completely eliminate their rights to challenge government actions. Litigants can still pursue cases and seek relief within the constraints of the new ruling, albeit with a more limited scope than before.

Sources

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