Trump DOJ Asks Supreme Court To Restrain Activist Judges

The Justice Department heads to the Supreme Court on Thursday to defend President Donald Trump’s executive order on birthright citizenship in a case that could have far-reaching implications on activist judges’ ability to hamper Trump’s agenda. 

While the case, Trump v. Casa, revolves around Trump’s day one actions on birthright citizenship, the primary arguments are expected to focus on the power of lone judges to issue universal injunctions that apply to the whole country. The Trump administration has asked the court to rule three nationwide injunctions issued against the birthright citizenship order are only applied to the parties involved and not the whole country. 

For the first 170 years of American jurisprudence, nationwide injunctions were virtually unknown,” Solicitor General John Sauer wrote in an April 7 filing. “Their use remained sparing until this century, when they saw a dramatic upsurge in 2017, followed by an explosion in the last three months.”

“These injunctions exceed the district courts’ authority under Article III and gravely encroach on the President’s executive power under Article II. This Court’s intervention is urgently needed to restore the constitutional balance of separated powers,” he added. 

A win for the Trump administration would be significant blow to the Left, which has utilized judges to block much of Trump’s policies from immigration to efforts to dismantle the sprawling federal bureaucracy.

Sauer will present arguments before the court for about 30 minutes before two lawyers from public and private groups challenging Trump’s order argue for 15 minutes each. The Justice Department has asked the Supreme Court to narrow the scope of the three injunctions issued against Trump’s “Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship,” executive order.

That executive order directed the government to stop granting citizenship to individuals who were born to people illegally in the country or who were born to people living transiently in the United States. 

During a background call on the case attended by The Daily Wire, a Justice Department official said “the key question” in the case is about “what to do about all these nationwide injunctions.” The official noted that the rash of universal injunctions was “devastating” for Trump’s “ability to effectuate the agenda that he was elected to do.”

The official noted that 35 of the 39 total universal injunctions issued against the Trump administration have come from the same five courts: the districts of Massachusetts, Maryland, Washington, D.C., Northern California, and Western Washington.

“They just shop for the favorable forums in order to drag the executive branch’s policies to a halt,” an official said, adding that the Trump administration would be ready to defend the merits of the birthright citizenship order when and if those arguments came up.

Hans von Spakovsky, a senior legal fellow at the Heritage Foundation, told The Daily Wire, that he suspected the Supreme Court decided to take up the case partially in response to criticism for not reigning in district court judges in a multitude of other cases.

“The fact that they scheduled oral arguments on this case, past their usual deadline, tells you the importance that the court is attaching to this,” he said, noting the last oral arguments are typically scheduled for the beginning of May. 

Previous rulings from the court, including U.S. v. Mendoza (1984), could provide guidance for the court. In that decision, the court ruled that when a judgment is rendered against the government, courts can only apply judgment to parties in the lawsuit, von Spakovsky said. 

Von Spakovsky said that he expects the justices to focus on the injunction issue, and not the substantive debate after Trump’s interpretation of the 14th Amendment. He said that a win for the Trump administration could act as a warning to judges to not overstep their activity.

However, a loss he said would even further open up the floodgates of challenges to the administration.

“If the government loses this particular issue, it’s like opening the gates to a rock concert and letting the crowd just rush in without giving tickets,” he told The Daily Wire. “It’s going to mean that these judges all over the country can continue to issue these nationwide injunctions against almost any executive order.”

Ben & Jerry’s Co-Founder Arrested For Stunt During RFK Testimony

Several protesters were tackled and arrested by Capitol Police on Wednesday, after they screamed and interrupted testimony from Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. before the Senate Health Committee.

Among the protesters who were arrested was Ben & Jerry’s co-founder Ben Cohen. It’s unclear what he was protesting regarding Kennedy, but other protesters had signs that called RFK “anti-vaccine” or said, “RFK Lies, People with AIDS Die.”

Samuel Corum/Getty Images

As video footage below shows, Kennedy and others in the room were startled when the protesters screamed to interrupt the secretary’s opening statement. Some are heard yelling, “RFK kills people with hate!” Quickly, Capitol Police stepped in to remove the protesters, some by force.

WATCH:

Very aggressive protesters at Bobby’s hearing. I don’t like this one bit. Besides President Trump, he has the biggest target on his back. 🙏 pic.twitter.com/L0YmJIlZaU

— Link Lauren (@itslinklauren) May 14, 2025

Cohen was arrested for obstruction, according to authorities, Fox News reported on Wednesday. Six others were arrested, as well.

Kent Nishimura/Bloomberg via Getty Images

As highlighted by The Daily Wire earlier on Wednesday, Kennedy sparred a number of Democrats during his testimony before the House committee on appropriations.

Kennedy defended cuts made to HHS and called out Democrats for echoing party talking points and for engaging in what he viewed as the politicization of public health.

In one instance, Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-CT) accused Kennedy of potentially breaking the law and putting Americans’ health at risk over cuts he’s made at HHS. The secretary shot back by describing the “absolute cataclysmic disorganization” of the department when he took it over, which he said was under her oversight for decades.

“We had nine separate offices of women’s health,” Kennedy explained. “When we consolidate them, Democrats say that we’re eliminating them. We’re not, we’re still appropriating the $3.7 billion, but we’re not keeping all nine. We had eight separate offices for minority health, we eliminated one. We had 27 HIV offices, we had 59 behavioral health programs.”

Later in the hearing, Kennedy called out DeLauro for her partisan behavior and called on Democrats to work with him on health initiatives.

“Let’s work together and do something we all believe in, which is have healthy kids in our country, for God’s sake,” he said. “There’s no such thing as Republican children or Democrat children. There’s just kids, and we should all be concerned with them.”

Related: Sparks Fly At Hearing As RFK Jr. Takes On Dems For Playing Politics With Health

About Us

Virtus (virtue, valor, excellence, courage, character, and worth)

Vincit (conquers, triumphs, and wins)