Supreme Court hands Trump explosive win, slashes Judges’ power to block his Agenda

The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday delivered a significant victory to former President Donald Trump, ruling in favour of curbing the power of lower courts to issue sweeping nationwide injunctions against federal government policies.

The decision marks a substantial shift in the balance of judicial oversight over executive action, offering Trump and future presidents greater latitude in implementing their agendas.

Writing for the majority, Justice Amy Coney Barrett, Trump’s final nominee to the court, made a sharp distinction between judicial review and judicial overreach.

“Federal courts do not exercise general oversight of the executive branch; they resolve cases and controversies consistent with the authority Congress has given them,” Barrett stated.

“When a court concludes that the executive branch has acted unlawfully, the answer is not for the court to exceed its power, too,” Barrett said.

The ruling restricts the ability of individual plaintiffs or courts to halt federal policies on a nationwide scale, a tactic that had been repeatedly used to block Trump-era immigration rules, budgetary decisions, and structural shifts in federal agencies.

While the decision does not explicitly endorse Trump’s controversial attempt to dismantle birthright citizenship, it weakens the legal tools typically used to oppose such sweeping executive actions.

Legal analysts say this change will likely have a greater impact on future policy disputes than on the citizenship issue itself.

“This ruling nominally allows the Trump administration to put the birthright citizenship order into effect across most of the country,” explained Steve Vladeck, CNN Supreme Court analyst and law professor at Georgetown University. “But it’s going to be far more consequential for the president’s broader policy ambitions.”

Attorney General Pam Bondi celebrated the decision, describing it as a necessary correction to what she called an “endless barrage” of legal roadblocks against Trump’s policies.

“Today, the Supreme Court instructed district courts to STOP the endless barrage of nationwide injunctions against President Trump,” she posted on X.

“This Department of Justice will continue to zealously defend the president’s policies and his authority to implement them.”

However, the ruling drew sharp criticism from the liberal wing of the court. In a strongly worded dissent, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson warned of a dangerous erosion of the constitutional checks on presidential power.

“Executive lawlessness will flourish,” she wrote, arguing that the majority’s decision could weaken the ability of lower courts to rein in unlawful actions by the executive.

“Eventually, executive power will become completely uncontainable, and our beloved constitutional Republic will be no more.”

Jackson condemned what she described as a “culture of disdain” toward lower court rulings, suggesting the majority’s stance undermines the role of the judiciary and accelerates democratic decline.

While the ruling may not guarantee implementation of Trump’s stalled birthright citizenship order, it reshapes the legal battleground.

By raising the bar for nationwide relief, it tilts power toward the presidency, a legacy that could extend well beyond Trump’s political future and into the hands of his successors.