Donald Trump hails 'giant win' after Supreme Court curbs judges' power
The US Supreme Court handed President Donald Trump a major victory on Friday by curbing the power of individual federal judges to block executive actions.
Mr Trump, in an impromptu media briefing at the White House, called the decision "a giant win".
"This morning, the Supreme Court has delivered a monumental victory for the Constitution, the separation of powers, and the rule of law in striking down the excessive use of nationwide injunctions interfering with the normal functioning of the executive branch," he said.
The case stems from Mr Trump's order denying birthright citizenship to US-born children of parents who are in the country illegally.
"Thanks to this decision, we can now promptly file to proceed with numerous policies that have been wrongly enjoyed on a nationwide basis, and some of the cases, we're talking about ending birthright citizenship, which now comes to the fore," he said.
The court's 6-3 ruling, however, did not let Mr Trump's policy come into effect immediately and did not address the policy's legality.
The court said nationwide injunctions issued by lower court judges "likely exceed the equitable authority that Congress has granted to federal courts".
The outcome was a victory for the Republican President, who has complained about individual judges putting up obstacles to his agenda.
But the ruling left open the possibility that the birthright citizenship changes could remain blocked nationwide.
Birthright citizenship automatically makes anyone born in the US an American citizen, including children born to parents in the country illegally. The right was enshrined soon after the Civil War in the Constitution's 14th Amendment.
Mr Trump said that ruling was meant for "the babies of slaves", rather than for people "trying to scam the system".
The US is among about 30 countries where birthright citizenship — the principle of jus soli or 'right of the soil' — is applied. Most are in the Americas, and Canada and Mexico are among them.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The National
3 hours ago
- The National
Gaza ceasefire talks intensify as Trump suggests a deal may be within reach
Gaza ceasefire talks being held in Cairo have moved up a gear, with US President Donald Trump saying an agreement could be reached within a week and mediator Qatar speaking of a window of opportunity that should be seized. Speaking from the Oval Office during the signing on Friday of a peace accord between the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Rwanda, Mr Trump said he had spoken earlier with people involved in brokering the previous truce in the 20-month Israel-Gaza war. 'We think within the next week, we're going to get a ceasefire,' he said without elaborating. In Qatar, which has been mediating in the conflict together with the US and Egypt, Foreign Ministry spokesman Majed Al Ansari said negotiators are engaging with Israel and Hamas to build on momentum from this week's Israel-Iran ceasefire and work towards a Gaza truce and the release of hostages held by Hamas -led groups. 'If we don't utilise this window of opportunity and this momentum, it's an opportunity lost among many in the near past. We don't want to see that again,' he told AFP in an interview. "We have seen US pressure and what it can accomplish," he said, referring to a truce agreed in January. The US, Qatar and Egypt have been trying to broker a new ceasefire after that truce collapsed on March 18 when Israel resumed military operations, two weeks after it ordered a halt to relief aid entering the coastal strip where hundreds of thousands are facing hunger and shortages of basic items. Mr Trump did not explain why he was optimistic about reaching a truce soon. The US has said several times previously that a deal was within reach, only for the talks to reach a deadlock as both Israel and Hamas stuck to their conditions. Sources familiar with the peace effort in Cairo told The National that the talks have gathered pace in recent days, with US envoy Bishara Bahbah, a Palestinian-American, engaging intense conversations with the Egyptian mediators and senior Hamas officials who have been in Cairo since Monday. Mr Trump's special Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff is expected in the region early next week, when he will visit Egypt, Israel and Qatar, according to the sources. A mid-level Israeli official was in Cairo earlier this week and senior negotiators from the Mossad spy agency and military were expected soon, the sources said. There has been no confirmation of this yet from the Israeli government. The sources told The National earlier this week that the proposals on the table to pause the war and secure the release of the remaining hostages in Gaza were not significantly different from those discussed in previous rounds. However, the current discussions are centred on modifying those proposals to provide for a "comprehensive accord" to be negotiated during a proposed 60-day truce, which includes a long-term ceasefire and Israeli withdrawal from Gaza, they said on Saturday. However, Israel remained reluctant to agree at present to anything beyond a temporary truce and the release of all the hostages, they said. Additionally, Israel continues to demand a security presence in Gaza as well as the complete dismantling of Hamas's military and governing capacities. Hamas has meanwhile shown some flexibility over the timeline for the initial release of 10 living hostages and the remains of half of those who died while in captivity, as provided for in the proposals, said the sources. Hamas still holds about 50 hostages, of whom 20 are believed to be alive, according to Israel's military. Hamas had previously said it wanted to stagger the release of the 10 living hostages over the 60-day truce to ensure Israel's compliance with the deal. Israel rejected this, insisting all 10 must be freed the day the truce goes into effect. Hamas also wants Israel to remove its troops from designated land corridors for the delivery and distribution of aid to Gazans, the sources said. It also insists that a proposed commission of independent Palestinian technocrats start running the war-battered enclave the day the truce goes into force. The sources said proposals for Hamas to lay down its arms and keep them in storage, as well as the departure from Gaza of senior Hamas officials to live in exile, are still on the negotiating table. The group is open to both conditions, but categorically refusing to disarm, and will agree to the exile of some of its leaders only if Israel guarantees not to target them. The Gaza war began when Hamas-led militants attacked southern Israeli communities, killing about 1,200 people and taking another 250 hostage. Israel responded with a devastating military campaign that has killed more that 56,000 Palestinians and wounded more than twice that number, according to authorities in Gaza. The fighting has also displaced most of the territory's 2.3 million residents and reduced much of its built-up area to rubble.
Zawya
4 hours ago
- Zawya
Statement by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) of Ukraine on the Peace Agreement Between the Democratic Republic of the Congo and the Republic of Rwanda
We welcome the signing of the peace agreement between the Democratic Republic of the Congo and the Republic of Rwanda. This important achievement for Africa and international security has been made possible thanks to the decisive role of the United States and personally President Donald Trump, as well as a number of countries and international organizations. In particular, we commend the constructive efforts of the Presidents of Angola and Kenya, the African Union, the East African Community, the Southern African Development Community, and the United Nations. The State of Qatar has made a significant contribution to advancing the peace settlement, especially by ensuring complementarity and coherence among various mediation initiatives. Ukraine highly values the effective mediation by the United States. We congratulate U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio and American diplomacy on this achievement. The active involvement of the American side in the negotiation process played a decisive role in reaching and signing the peace agreement. We hope for the responsible efforts of both parties in implementing the peace agreement and in ensuring lasting peace and security in the Great Lakes region. This will create favourable conditions for strengthening the economic potential and social stability of the states in the region, improving their investment attractiveness, and deepening economic ties with other countries. Ukraine reaffirms its commitment to comprehensively intensify mutually beneficial cooperation with the countries of the region, including a readiness to contribute meaningfully to achieving their socio-economic development goals. We are confident that the United States can play a similarly decisive role in achieving a just peace and ending Russia's war of aggression against Ukraine. This peace agreement demonstrates that it is possible to stop the killing and restore peace even under challenging circumstances, when the international community acts resolutely and the parties participate in the peace process in good faith. We emphasize that the foundation of the peaceful settlement between the Democratic Republic of the Congo and the Republic of Rwanda is based on the fundamental principles of the UN Charter, including the mutual obligation of states to respect each other's territorial integrity and sovereignty within internationally recognized borders, to refrain from the threat or use of force, to avoid interference in internal affairs, and to facilitate the return of refugees and internally displaced persons. It is precisely these universally recognized principles of international law that underpin Ukraine's proposals for ending the war in Europe and restoring a comprehensive, just, and sustainable peace for Ukraine. Distributed by APO Group on behalf of Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine.
Gulf Today
4 hours ago
- Gulf Today
Top US court evades issue of birthright citizenship
The United States Supreme Court issued a 6-3 ruling, which denied the federal courts the right to block executive orders nationwide. The US Federal Government of President Donald Trump too sought a limited ruling from the Supreme Court. The government challenged the federal courts' authority to issue orders blocking the executive directives nationwide that a baby born in the United States does not automatically gain the US citizenship. This is part of Trump's agenda to restrict immigration. Three federal courts in Maryland, Massachusetts and Washington state have issued orders that the presidential order should be blocked nationwide. That is, the President's order cannot be implemented anywhere in the country and against nobody. The question before the Supreme Court was whether the federal courts have the authority to issue orders blocking nationwide the implementation of executive directive. The majority of the Supreme Court, the conservative six, have ruled that the federal courts do not have the right to issue orders blocking executive directives nationwide. The majority opinion written Justice Amy Cony Barrett had however said that the government cannot implement its orders for 30 days, and the federal courts have been asked to look to give specific remedies to those who have appealed, and not provide relief to everyone across the country. President Trump had of course claimed victory. The Supreme Court was not into playing the political game. The dissident opinion was written by Justice Sotomayor along with Justice Kagan and Justice Jackson. The dissenting judges argued that the federal courts had the right to stop a law that is patently unconstitutional – the President's order saying that anyone born in the United States does not become a citizen – because there is no other alternative. The two sides are arguing slightly different positions. The majority opinion as written by Justice Barrett recognizes the issue whether the President order reversing what is guaranteed by the 14th Constitutional Amendment stands the test of law. Justice Barrett says, '…the principal dissent (Justice Sotomayor) argues because the Executive Order is unconstitutional…' the Executive Branch has no right to impose [it] against anyone. The principal dissent's analysis of the Executive Order is premature because the birthright citizenship issue is not before us. And because the birthright citizenship issue is not before us, we take no position on whether the dissent's analysis is right.' It is clear that Justice Barrett is taking technically right and narrow view of the case before the court. But Justice Mayor in her dissent opinion has laid out the case clearly and in a straightforward manner. She wrote: 'Children born in the United States and subject to its laws are United States citizens. That has been the legal rule since the founding, and it was the English rule well before then. This Court once attempted to repudiate it, holding in Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857) that the children of enslaved black Americans were not citizens. To remedy that grievous error, the States passed in 1866 and Congress ratified in 1868 the Fourteenth Amendment's Citizenship Clause, which enshrined birthright citizenship in the Constitution. There it has remained, accepted and respected by Congress, by the Executive, and by this Court. Until today.' Justice Barrett and Justice Sotomayor are arguing along different lines. Justice Barrett will find it hard to wriggle out of the implications of the Fourteenth Amendment. She found an easy way out by saying that the issue was not before the Court. The issue will come up before the Court quite soon, and she and the majority conservatives in the Court will have to take a position.
