Justice Amy Coney Barrett delivered a sharp rebuke to Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson in a major Supreme Court decision that limits the power of lower courts to block presidential actions nationwide.
The 6-3 ruling in Trump v. CASA, Inc. marked a significant win for President Donald Trump and narrowed the use of universal injunctions by federal judges.
Writing for the majority, Barrett argued that broad judicial authority oversteps constitutional bounds.
“We will not dwell on Justice Jackson’s argument, which is at odds with more than two centuries’ worth of precedent, not to mention the Constitution itself,” she wrote. “Justice Jackson decries an imperial Executive while embracing an imperial Judiciary.”
The case addressed whether federal district courts can issue injunctions that extend beyond the parties involved in a case.
The ruling restricts courts from applying injunctions nationwide, a practice that has gained prominence in recent years as a tool to halt executive actions.
Justice Sonia Sotomayor authored the primary dissent, joined by Jackson and Justice Elena Kagan.
In a separate dissent, Jackson criticized the majority for focusing too heavily on procedural technicalities rather than broader constitutional principles.
“It is not difficult to predict how this all ends. Eventually, executive power will