{"id":1691,"date":"2026-04-02T21:52:31","date_gmt":"2026-04-02T21:52:31","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/pittglobalnews.com\/?p=1691"},"modified":"2026-04-06T01:40:04","modified_gmt":"2026-04-06T01:40:04","slug":"us-supreme-court-hands-trump-giant-win-on-powers-of-judges","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/pittglobalnews.com\/es\/us-supreme-court-hands-trump-giant-win-on-powers-of-judges\/","title":{"rendered":"US Supreme Court hands Trump ‘giant’ win on powers of judges"},"content":{"rendered":"

US President Donald Trump hailed a “giant win” Friday after the Supreme Court curbed lone judges from blocking the Republican’s raft of controversial policies. The 6-3 ruling, with the court’s liberal justices all dissenting, stemmed from Trump’s bid to end birthright citizenship.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The court said individual district judges had likely exceeded their powers by issuing nationwide injunctions, which have also blocked a string of Trump’s hardline policies on immigration, diversity and firing federal employees.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

“The Supreme Court has delivered a monumental victory for the Constitution, the separation of powers and the rule of law,” 79-year-old Trump told a hastily arranged press conference at the White House.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Trump said he would now proceed with “so many policies” that had been “wrongly” blocked<\/h5>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Trump said he would now proceed with “so many policies” that had been “wrongly” blocked, including stopping funding for transgender people and “sanctuary cities” for migrants. His initial reaction to the ruling came in a post on Truth Social, welcomed it as a “GIANT WIN.”<\/p>\n\n\n\n

US Attorney General Pam Bondi, standing alongside Trump at the podium, said the ruling would stop “rogue judges striking down President Trump’s policies across the entire nation.” Trump separately hailed a “great ruling” by the Supreme Court to let parents opt their children out of LGBTQ-themed books at public schools.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Critics say the move threatens secular education by opening the door to religious objections.- ‘Step toward authoritarianism’ The Supreme Court did not rule on the constitutionality of Trump’s executive order seeking to end automatic citizenship for children born on US soil.
<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Supreme Court majority decision was written by Judge Amy Coney Barrett, a Trump appointee<\/h6>\n\n\n\n

But the broader decision on the scope of judicial rulings removes a big roadblock to Trump’s often highly contested policy agenda and has far-reaching ramifications for the ability of the judiciary to rein in Trump — or future US presidents.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Supreme Court’s majority decision was authored by Justice Amy Coney Barrett, a Trump appointee, and joined by the other five conservative justices. “Federal courts do not exercise general oversight of the Executive Branch,” wrote Barrett, who has previously been a frequent target of Trump loyalists over previous decisions that went against the president.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Supreme Court’s three liberal justices dissented. Justice Sonia Sotomayor said the ruling was “nothing less than an open invitation for the government to bypass the constitution.” Democrats swiftly blasted the decision, saying it would embolden Trump as he pushes the boundaries of presidential power in his second term. Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer called it a “terrifying step toward authoritarianism.”
<\/p>\n\n\n\n

“This really returns the Constitution”<\/h6>\n\n\n\n

Trump however rejected concerns about the concentration of power in the White House. “This is really the opposite of that,” Trump said. “This really brings back the Constitution.”<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Trump’s executive order on birthright citizenship is just one of a number of his moves that have been blocked by district court judges around the country — both Democratic and Republican appointees \u2013 since he took office in January.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Courts have, for example, blocked or slowed down his hardline immigration crackdown, firing of federal employees, efforts to end diversity programs and punitive actions against law firms and universities.- ‘Lawless actions’ Past presidents have also complained about national injunctions shackling their agenda. But such orders have sharply risen under Trump, who saw more in his first two months than Democrat Joe Biden did during his first three years in office.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The case was about Trump’s executive order that ended birthright citizenship<\/h6>\n\n\n\n

The case was ostensibly about Trump’s executive order ending birthright citizenship, which was deemed unconstitutional by courts in Maryland, Massachusetts and Washington state. But it actually focused on whether a single federal district court judge has the right to issue a nationwide block to a presidential decree with a universal injunction.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The issue has become a rallying cry for Trump and his Republican allies, who accuse the judiciary of impeding his agenda against the will of voters. Steven Schwinn, a law professor at the University of Illinois Chicago, told AFP that the court’s ruling “sharply undermines the power of federal courts to rein in lawless actions by the government.”<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Trump’s executive order on birthright citizenship decrees that children born to parents in the United States illegally or on temporary visas would not automatically become citizens. Trump said that the policy “was meant for the babies of slaves,” dating back to the US Civil War era in the mid 1800s.<\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

US President Donald Trump hailed a “giant win” Friday after the Supreme Court curbed lone judges from blocking the Republican’s raft of controversial policies. The 6-3 ruling, with the court’s liberal justices all dissenting, stemmed from Trump’s bid to end birthright citizenship. The court said individual district judges had likely exceeded their powers by issuing […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":1692,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_gspb_post_css":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[38],"tags":[42],"class_list":["post-1691","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-immigration","tag-hl1"],"blocksy_meta":[],"brizy_media":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/pittglobalnews.com\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1691","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/pittglobalnews.com\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/pittglobalnews.com\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pittglobalnews.com\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pittglobalnews.com\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1691"}],"version-history":[{"count":5,"href":"https:\/\/pittglobalnews.com\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1691\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1703,"href":"https:\/\/pittglobalnews.com\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1691\/revisions\/1703"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pittglobalnews.com\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/1692"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/pittglobalnews.com\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1691"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pittglobalnews.com\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1691"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pittglobalnews.com\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1691"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}