Supreme Court Shuts Down Nationwide Blocks on Presidential Orders

What Happened

On June 27th, the Supreme Court ruled that federal judges can no longer block presidential policies nationwide. The 6-3 decision came from CASA Inc. v. Trump, a case involving President Trump’s January 20th executive order. This order restricts birthright citizenship for children born in the U.S. to undocumented parents.

In response, federal judges in Maryland, Washington state, and New Hampshire issued nationwide injunctions. These halted the policy in all 50 states while legal challenges proceeded. 

The Supreme Court’s decision reverses that approach. It states that judges can only block policies for the individuals or groups directly involved in the lawsuit. It does not prevent courts from ruling on the legality of presidential orders, but limits how broadly their initial rulings can be applied.

Why It Matters

The ruling alters how executive power is challenged in court. Nationwide injunctions allowed a single judge to freeze a federal policy everywhere, regardless of where the case was filed or who was directly involved.

Courts have used this tool under multiple presidents, both Republican and Democrat, to temporarily stop policies on immigration, healthcare, environmental rules, and other issues.

With this option removed, federal policies will remain in effect during legal challenges, except for individuals or groups directly involved in a lawsuit. Only those directly part of a lawsuit would be exempt from the policy while the case proceeds.

Broader blocks could still happen, but only through class-action lawsuits or final rulings, which typically take months or years.

How It Affects Readers

The most immediate effect will be seen in President Trump’s current immigration orders. His birthright citizenship policy, which aims to deny automatic citizenship to certain U.S.-born children, will now only be blocked for the plaintiffs who brought the lawsuits in Maryland, Washington, and New Hampshire. That means other families in similar situations will still be subject to the policy unless they join a lawsuit or file one themselves.

While some people will be protected from presidential orders, others won’t. This will depend entirely on where they live and whether they have legal representation.

The same will apply to other recent Trump orders. These include asylum restrictions and federal funding conditions for sanctuary cities. Nationwide injunctions had temporarily blocked those policies in the past. With this ruling, future lawsuits will have a narrower reach.

Moving forward, when new policies are rolled out, individuals seeking protection from them will likely need to file their own lawsuits or rely on class actions, which take time to organize and pursue.

The Supreme Court’s decision doesn’t change whether presidential orders can be challenged. However, it does change how quickly and broadly courts can offer relief. Legal protections will now depend more on individual lawsuits as opposed to sweeping, nationwide rulings.