Supreme Court hands Trump ‘Giant Win' in birthright citizenship case
The Supreme Court handed President Donald Trump a 'GIANT WIN' on Friday by ruling against 'universal injunctions' and limiting court injunctions after a lower court issued a preliminary injunction against the president's executive order blocking birthright citizenship for illegal immigrants.
In a 6-3 ruling on Friday, the Supreme Court wrote, 'Universal injunctions likely exceed the equitable authority that Congress has given to federal courts. The Court grants the Government's applications for a partial stay of the injunctions entered below, but only to the extent that the injunctions are broader than necessary to provide complete relief to each plaintiff with standing to sue.'
In Friday's ruling, Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett claimed that the 'universal injunction was conspicuously nonexistent' for the majority of U.S. history.
'Its absence from 18th- and 19th-century equity practice settles the question of judicial authority,' Barrett wrote. 'That the absence continued into the 20th century renders any claim of historical pedigree still more implausible.'
Barrett explained that the Supreme Court's ruling does not address whether the president's executive order on birthright citizenship violates the Nationality Act of the Citizenship Clause. Instead, Barrett said the issue presented to the Supreme Court 'is one of remedy: whether, under the Judiciary Act of 1789, federal courts have equitable authority to issue universal injunctions.'
READ MORE: Supreme Court issues major deportation ruling
Barrett added, 'A universal injunction can be justified only as an exercise of equitable authority, yet Congress has granted federal courts no such power.'
In a concurring opinion, Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh explained that the court's decision will now require district courts throughout the country to 'follow proper legal procedures' with regard to injunctions.
'Most significantly, district courts can no longer award preliminary nationwide or classwide relief except when such relief is legally authorized,' Kavanaugh stated.
Following Friday's Supreme Court ruling, Trump issued a statement on Truth Social, saying, 'GIANT WIN in the United States Supreme Court! Even the Birthright Citizenship Hoax has been, indirectly, hit hard. It had to do with the babies of slaves (same year!), not the SCAMMING of our Immigration process.'
Vice President J.D. Vance also released a statement regarding the Supreme Court's decision, describing it as a 'huge ruling.' Vance claimed that the ruling will stop the 'ridiculous process of nationwide injunctions' that Democrat judges have used to continually block the president's executive orders.
'Under our system, everyone has to follow the law–including judges!' Vance tweeted.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Post
39 minutes ago
- New York Post
GOP blocks Dems' efforts to restrict Trump's war powers after strikes on Iran nuke sites
WASHINGTON — Democratic efforts in the Senate to prevent President Donald Trump from further escalating with Iran fell short Friday, with Republicans blocking a resolution that marked Congress' first attempt to reassert its war powers following U.S. strikes on Iranian nuclear sites. The resolution, authored by Sen. Tim Kaine of Virginia, aimed to affirm that Trump should seek authorization from Congress before launching more military action against Iran. Asked Friday if he would bomb Iranian nuclear sites again if he deemed necessary, Trump said, 'Sure, without question.' The measure was defeated in a 53-47 vote in the Republican-held Senate. One Democrat, Sen. John Fetterman of Pennsylvania, joined Republicans in opposition, while Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky was the only Republican to vote in favor. Republicans beat back a Democrat effort, led by Sen. Tim Kaine, to restrict Donald Trump's war powers. AP Most Republicans have said Iran posed an imminent threat that required decisive action from Trump, and they backed his decision to bomb three Iranian nuclear sites last weekend without seeking congressional approval. 'Of course, we can debate the scope and strategy of our military engagements,' said Sen. Bill Hagerty, R-Tenn. 'But we must not shackle our president in the middle of a crisis when lives are on the line.' Democrats cast doubt on that justification, arguing the president should have come to Congress first. They also said the president did not update them adequately, with Congress' first briefings taking place Thursday. 'The idea is this: We shouldn't send our sons and daughters into war unless there's a political consensus that this is a good idea, this is a national interest,' Kaine said in a Thursday interview with The Associated Press. The resolution, Kaine said, wasn't aimed at restricting the president's ability to defend against a threat, but that 'if it's offense, let's really make sure we're making the right decision.' In a statement following Friday's vote, Kaine said he was 'disappointed that many of my colleagues are not willing to stand up and say Congress' should be a part of a decision to go to war. Democrats' argument for backing the resolution centered on the War Powers Resolution, passed in the early 1970s, which requires the president 'in every possible instance' to 'consult with Congress before introducing United States Armed Forces.' Speaking on the Senate floor ahead of Friday's vote, Paul said he would back the resolution, saying that 'despite the tactical success of our strikes, they may end up proving to be a strategic failure.' 'It is unclear if this intervention will fully curtail Iran's nuclear aspirations,' said Paul. Trump is just the latest in a line of presidents to test the limits of the resolution — though he's done so at a time when he's often bristling at the nation's checks and balances. Trump said Friday he would again bomb Iranian nuclear sites if he deemed it necessary. AP Trump on Monday sent a letter to Congress — as required by the War Powers Resolution — that said strikes on Iran over the weekend were 'limited in scope and purpose' and 'designed to minimize casualties, deter future attacks and limit the risk of escalation.' But following classified briefings with top White House officials this week, some lawmakers remain skeptical about how imminent the threat truly was. 'There was no imminent threat to the United States,' said Rep. Jim Himes, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, after Friday's classified briefings. 'There's always an Iranian threat to the world. But, I have not seen anything to suggest that the threat from the Iranians was radically different last Saturday than it was two Saturdays ago,' Himes said. Despite Democratic skepticism, nearly all Republicans applauded Trump's decision to strike Iran. And for GOP senators, supporting the resolution would have meant rebuking the president at the same time they're working to pass his major legislative package.
Fox News
40 minutes ago
- Fox News
Oversight chair demands Jean-Pierre, other former WH staff testify on alleged Biden mental decline coverup
An influential House committee is demanding that former White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre and three other former top White House staffers appear before Congress to testify about the alleged cover-up of former President Joe Biden's mental decline. Committee on Oversight and Government Reform Chairman James Comer, R-Ky., has been on the hunt for who was making decisions in Biden's inner circle during the president's apparent mental decline. On Friday, he sent letters to Karine-Pierre and former White House chief of staff Jeff Zients, former senior deputy press secretary Andrew Bates and former special assistant to the president Ian Sams, demanding they present themselves for transcribed interviews with the oversight committee. The letters are part of the committee's ongoing investigation into the alleged attempted cover-up of Biden's decline and the potentially unauthorized issuance of sweeping pardons and other executive actions by senior White House officials usurping Biden's presidential authority. In his letters, Comer says the committee believes that the four top Biden staffers have "critical" information on "who made key decisions and exercised the powers of the executive branch during the previous administration, possibly without former President Biden's consent." The letter to Jean-Pierre stated that as White House press secretary and a top Biden confidante, "you were not only near the president daily, but you were 'alongside the ranks of the president's top confidantes.'" "Your assertion, on multiple occasions, that President Biden's decline was attributable to such tactics as 'cheap fakes' or 'misinformation' cannot go without investigation," wrote Comer. He said that "if White House staff carried out a strategy lasting months or even years to hide the chief executive's condition — or to perform his duties — Congress may need to consider a legislative response." Comer set interview dates in late August and early September and gave the four senior officials until July 4 to confirm they would comply with the demands voluntarily or if they will "require a subpoena to compel your attendance for a deposition." Jean-Pierre, Zients, Bates and Sams are the latest former Biden senior officials to receive a congressional summons from Comer as part of the Oversight Committee's investigation into the alleged cover-up. The chairman also issued subpoenas to Dr. Kevin O'Connor, Biden's physician, and Anthony Bernal, former assistant to the president and senior advisor to the first lady, after they refused to appear before the committee voluntarily. In a statement to Fox News Digital, Comer said that "as part of our aggressive investigation into the cover-up of his cognitive decline and potentially unauthorized executive actions, we must hear from those who aided and abetted this farce." "President Biden's inner circle repeatedly told the American people that he was 'sharp as ever,' dismissing any commentary about his obvious mental decline as 'gratuitous,'" he said. "They fed these false talking points to progressive allies and the media, who helped perpetuate that President Biden was fit to serve." Jean-Pierre, Zients, Bates and Sams did not reply to Fox News Digital's request for comment before publication.
Fox Sports
42 minutes ago
- Fox Sports
Arizona governor approves up to $500M in taxpayer funds to upgrade home of Diamondbacks
Associated Press PHOENIX (AP) — Arizona Gov. Katie Hobbs signed legislation Friday that funds up to $500 million in renovations to Chase Field, home of the Arizona Diamondbacks. The bill, which won bipartisan support in both of the state's GOP-controlled chambers, will use sales tax revenue from the stadium and nearby buildings for infrastructure upgrades over the next 30 years, including improvements to air conditioning systems and the stadium's retractable roof. The team said it will also contribute $250 million for the renovations at the stadium, which is located in downtown Phoenix and is surrounded by small businesses and restaurants that see a boost of activity during the baseball season. The legislation is one of a handful of bipartisan deals that Hobbs, a Democrat, prioritized negotiating during the session. She says the funding is a responsible use of taxpayer dollars, will provide good-paying jobs and ensure the Diamondbacks do not leave Phoenix. Attendance at games has increased since the team's 2023 run to the World Series, where the Diamondbacks lost to the Texas Rangers. This season they are averaging 31,420 fans per game — the highest in two decades. 'Without the Diamondbacks in Chase Field, there wouldn't be the tax revenue that's being used,' Hobbs spokesperson Christian Slater said. The bill cleared the Legislature June 23 after months of debate that included the question of whether the Diamondbacks could potentially leave unless a public funding deal was reached. Other MLB teams have threatened to leave host cities if they did not get public financing. The Oakland A's, for example, complained for years about the Oakland Coliseum and an inability to gain government assistance for a new ballpark. Now the team is bound for Las Vegas, where a groundbreaking ceremony was held this month for a $1.75 billion ballpark that is expected to be completed in time for the 2028 season. Nevada and Clark County approved up to $380 million in public funds for the project. And last year voters in Jackson County, Missouri, rejected an attempt to extend a sales tax that would have helped fund a ballpark for the Kansas City Royals and stadium renovations for the Kansas City Chiefs. Lawmakers in Kansas are trying to lure the teams with government subsidies, and Missouri is trying to keep them with its own financial incentives. The Diamondbacks have spent nearly three decades in their downtown ballpark, which is owned by the Maricopa County Stadium District. In 2017, the team sued the district over funding for repairs and sought to remove a contractual clause preventing the team from looking into other stadium options. A perennial problem has been the park's air conditioning system and its ability to keep it cool in triple-digit summer heat, team president Derrick Hall said. Fans of country music star Morgan Wallen bemoaned the heat at a concert there last July, despite the retractable roof being closed. Concession stands ran out of water, and some people simply left. Chase Field was one of the first MLB stadiums to have a retractable roof. Now seven out of the 30 teams play under one, including the Brewers, Blue Jays, Rangers, Marlins, Astros and Mariners. Chase Field also has a small swimming pool in right field, one of its most recognizable features. The funding from the Legislature will not mean upgrades to the pool or to stadium suites, the latter of which was a sticking point for Phoenix Mayor Kate Gallego. She got on board after the bill was updated to prevent funds from being used for suites and a cap was placed on how much money the city would contribute for a land deal should the Diamondbacks break from the Stadium District, according to Gallego chief of staff Seth Scott. Hobbs is running for reelection, and while it's too early to say whether the Diamondbacks funding will be part of her campaign messaging, it's another bipartisan win, her communications director Michael Beyer said. Democratic state Sen. Mitzi Epstein, who voted against the funding, said Hobbs' support for the bill was wrong and hurtful for Arizonans. She said she was disappointed that amendments to create public benefits such as free streaming of games failed. ___ Associated Press sports writer David Brandt in Phoenix contributed. ___ The Associated Press' women in the workforce and state government coverage receives financial support from Pivotal Ventures. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP's standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at recommended
