The Supreme Court just dropped a major decision that could change how courts deal with presidential power. On June 27, 2025, the Court ruled 6–3 that federal judges can’t issue blanket, nationwide orders to block executive actions in this case, an executive order from Donald Trump targeting birthright citizenship.
Yep, that birthright citizenship. The one protected by the 14th Amendment for more than 150 years.
But before you panic or celebrate, here’s what actually happened and why it’s a pretty big deal.
What’s the Backstory?
Donald Trump, on his first day back in office, signed an executive order telling federal agencies to deny U.S. citizenship to kids born here unless at least one parent is a U.S. citizen or green card holder. It’s a huge shift from how the 14th Amendment has long been interpreted, which, for generations, granted citizenship to almost anyone born on U.S. soil.
Immigration groups say this order could affect more than 150,000 newborns a year. Naturally, lawsuits followed, and federal judges quickly stepped in with nationwide injunctions to freeze the policy. That’s what led to this case landing at the Supreme Court.
What Did the Court Actually Decide?
Here’s the key thing: the Supreme Court did not rule on whether Trump’s order is constitutional. Instead, the majority focused on how lower courts responded, and they weren’t fans.
The Court said judges overstepped by issuing nationwide injunctions, blocking the executive order everywhere, not just for the people actually suing. Justice Amy Coney Barrett, writing for the majority, argued that courts need to stay within their limits. “When a court concludes that the Executive Branch has acted unlawfully,” she wrote, “the answer is not for the court to exceed its power, too.”
Translation: courts can’t act like referees for the whole country unless there’s a certified class action.
What This Means (and Doesn’t Mean)
Let’s be clear: this ruling doesn’t mean Trump’s birthright order is legal. That’s still an open question and will likely return to the Supreme Court later. For now, though, the order could be enforced in certain places while legal challenges continue.
So, the ruling doesn’t end the fight over birthright citizenship, but it does make it harder for courts to stop policies like this in one broad stroke.
What Are People Saying?
Trump called it a “big win” for the Constitution, separation of powers, and the rule of law. He’s framing it as validation for his immigration policies and a green light to move forward.
On the other hand, critics aren’t holding back. Immigrant rights groups and 22 states say the ruling weakens the judiciary’s ability to stand up to unconstitutional laws. Justice Sonia Sotomayor, in her dissent, said the order is “patently unconstitutional” and argued that this decision “kneecaps” the courts just when vulnerable communities need protection the most.
Within hours of the decision, a new class action lawsuit was filed to challenge the executive order. So yeah, this battle is just getting started.
What Happens Next?
The executive order is on pause—for now. The Court gave a 30-day window before enforcement kicks in, giving time for new legal action.
Expect more lawsuits, more headlines, and probably another trip to the Supreme Court. The real fight—over whether the Constitution allows the government to deny citizenship to children born in the U.S.—is still very much alive.
Why This Ruling Matters
This case isn’t just about one immigration order. It’s about how far courts can go to stop a president from enforcing sweeping policies. For decades, nationwide injunctions have been one of the judiciary’s strongest tools to put a check on executive power.
This ruling pulls back on that authority—potentially changing how future legal battles unfold, not just under Trump, but under any president. And as for the 14th Amendment’s promise of birthright citizenship? That fight isn’t over. Not even close.
Meta Description:
The Supreme Court limits federal courts’ power to block Trump’s executive order restricting birthright citizenship. The ruling narrows nationwide injunctions but leaves the order’s constitutionality undecided.
