SCOTUS rules against universal injunctions by activist judges, pokes fun at Justice Jackson for extra credit 🔥

Image for article: SCOTUS rules against universal injunctions by activist judges, pokes fun at Justice Jackson for extra credit 🔥

Davy Crockett

Jun 27, 2025

SCOTUS finally coming through:

No longer can a federal judge take a single case, file an injunction, and block the enforcement of the president's policy.

This case goes back to an executive order from Trump during his first few days in office about "birthright citizenship," or the practice of giving foreigners birth certificates if they happen to be born here (this has created an entire industry of "passport tourism" where foreigners come to America so their children can get automatic citizenship).

Judge John Coughenour said Trump's order was "blatantly unconstitutional."

While SCOTUS saw fit to protect the executive branch from one-off rulings like that, it did not rule on the actual issue of birthright citizenship issue itself, and it is unclear whether they'll take that up.

My favorite part of all this?

What Amy Coney Barrett had to say about Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, who obviously dissented with this ruling. 👇

💀

I'll leave this here as well for the legal nerds. Justice Alito also discussed the way class-action lawsuits have been weaponized against the executive branch.

You've seen the formula before: A random group of activist liberals bands together, sues Trump in a liberal district, and then a liberal judge uses the filing of the lawsuit as grounds to stop an executive order in its tracks, even if that random group of liberals has no standing to sue.

Big W here for Trump against the rogue judiciary!


P.S. Now check out our latest video 👇

Keep up with our latest videos — Subscribe to our YouTube channel!