Can a single judge really stop the president in their tracks?

In this episode of Immigration Weekly, Rosanna digs into a big Supreme Court decision that’s flying under the radar. While everyone’s talking about birthright citizenship, the Court actually avoided that issue and instead delivered a major shift in how much power federal judges have to block executive orders. She walks you through what happened, what it means for immigration and beyond, and why this could change the way our government works for years to come.

Listen to the Episode

Watch the Episode

 

Transcript

Everyone’s talking about U.S. immigration law, but nobody really knows how it works. I’m Rosanna Berardi. I’m the daughter of an immigrant, a former immigration inspector at the border, university professor, and founder and managing partner of Berardi Immigration Law.

I’ve done nothing but U.S. immigration law for over 30 years, and it’s time to stop the misinformation on all sides. I’m going to tell you how it all works, the inside story. This is Immigration Weekly with Rosanna Berardi.

The Supreme Court Case: What Happened and Why It Matters

Welcome to Immigration Weekly with Rosanna Berardi. I’m your host, Rosanna Berardi, and we’re going to talk today about the huge Supreme Court decision that was handed down the last day of the court’s term, nothing like prolonging it, regarding birthright citizenship. This was a big one.

We’ve been waiting. Remember, this was filed, this request for the court to hear it was filed on emergency appeal by the Trump administration, and the court agreed to take it. So, fun fact, not every case, not everyone who says, I want to go to the Supreme Court can do that.

The court gets tons and tons of submissions every year, and they look at the and they see what is really gravely concerning in America that needs addressing right away. They grant something called certiorari. Haven’t said that since law school.

That’s their way of saying, yes, we’re going to hear this. This is serious. So, back in April, they did that.

The oral arguments for this case were on May 15th. I did a whole podcast on what this case is really about, but basically, this case had little to do with immigration law and a lot to do with procedural rules. Ugh, boring, yawn, sort of.

So, basically, to understand this case, you have to understand what got us here and what got us here. So, on some day in January, right after the inauguration, President Trump took out his pen and said, we don’t like birthright citizenship. The Constitution says, if you’re born in the U.S., on U.S. soil, you’re a U.S. citizen. But the Trump administration contends that that was only written that way to benefit slaves and was not intended to allow anybody who’s here unlawfully to obtain U.S. citizenship. Now, that’s in the Constitution. President really shouldn’t be monkeying with anything in our Constitution.

Who does that? Fun fact, ding, ding, ding, Congress. Congress, hello.

Have you heard from them recently or ever? No, they don’t do anything. But anyway, technically, the procedure would be to request a constitutional amendment that had bipartisan support.

You know, the people that purportedly represent you in Congress. Yeah, those folks. They don’t do anything.

Anyway, so Trump says, along with other prior administrations, look, Congress, if you’re not going to do anything, we’re going to do it on our own. We’re going to file an executive order, and we don’t really care if you like it. So, what happens?

They file it, and right away, lots and lots of people said, no, we don’t like this. And it went up to federal courts. 22 states filed lawsuits that said, we don’t like this.

We think it’s unconstitutional. And guess what? Several federal district courts said, we don’t like this, and we are going to issue an injunction.

What’s an injunction? It’s a fancy way of saying stop. So, that executive order signed by the president pumped the brakes.

It’s not going anywhere. Some federal district court judge in Missouri or wherever didn’t like it, so it stopped it. Now, you have to understand, there’s more than 700 district court judges in the United States of America.

It’s a lot of people. But when you think about our country, 330 million people, 700 judges are really in control of what the presidency can do. Sounds like an unequal playing field, unequal balance of power.

The Trump administration is not the only one. Biden complained about it. Obama complained about all of these orders because one random judge could basically pump the brakes on the presidency.

The Bigger Impact: Limiting Injunctions and Expanding Executive Power

So, back to the Supreme Court decision. The Supreme Court said today, this case is not about birthright citizenship. We will not discuss whether it’s constitutional or not for the president to try, via executive order, to change the U.S. Constitution. That wasn’t the issue that was decided. The bigger issue, and this is huge, I would contend, yeah, a constitutional amendment, that’s pretty big. This is just as big.

This decision states the lower courts can no longer have this unrestricted power. So, that one judge in Missouri, he can’t pump the brakes for all of the United States. For 330 million people, imagine one plaintiff files a lawsuit in the federal district that Missouri is in.

That decision is applied to 330 million people. Sounds kind of wacky, right? But, to the contrary, if that didn’t happen, then what’s the concept of federal rulings if everything’s going to go state by state?

Anyway, Supreme Court, long opinion, 6-3, Supreme Court said today, listen, the Judiciary Act of 1798 that created this concept of an injunction never intended it for it to be all-encompassing, all-sweeping, to supersede the executive branch. Never, never, ever. The counterarguments about injunctions on the other side, kind of lame.

They’re pointing to how things worked in Great Britain many years ago, but in reality, in this administration, the administration’s been stopped 25 times since January with respect to executive orders. And some people say, well, good. I don’t like executive orders personally.

If you follow me, you know executive orders are garbage. Why are they used? Say it again.

Where’s Congress? Congress doesn’t do anything. So the administrations have said, we have a dysfunctional Congress.

We’re going to do it. Terrible idea for democracy. Why?

We’re supposed to have elected officials. We’re supposed to have three branches of government. And if you were an alien that came from outer space and watched what was going on, you would say, huh, there only really seems to be one, if not two, the Supreme Court, the judiciary doing anything.

So what’s going to happen now? Well, the Trump administration is saying we won. Victory lap.

Yes. Why? This decision opens the door.

Says federal courts, out of the way. You do not have the sweeping power to stop us from doing what we want to do. This is not just limited to immigration law.

This can be utilized for anything that the administration has wanted to do that’s been stopped. So as lawyers, when we hear some of these crazy executive order proposals, we’re like, oh, that won’t fly. There’ll be lawsuits, blah, blah, blah.

Well, guess what? Those lawsuits are not going to have the sweeping power that they once had. And that is why this decision is huge.

They punted the issue on birthright citizenship. They’re like, nope, we’re not going to touch that because the real issue here is injunctions. They addressed an issue that has been a huge problem for many, many, many administrations previous to the Trump administration and handed the executive branch, whether it’s Trump or the next person, a really big tool in their toolbox to use to get executive orders across the finish line.

This is a game changer. What do I think? I don’t know.

I think we’re going to see a lot more executive orders in the next three years. I think we’re going to see a lot less lawsuits. People can join class action lawsuits and still file.

It’s really the impact of that injunction. Will birthright citizenship ever hit the Supreme Court? Maybe.

If it were up to me, Rosanna Berardi for president, I would love for someone in Congress to introduce a congressional constitutional amendment proposal to change that if they so want it. I’m not going to fight over a constitutional provision, but if someone wanted to, there’s a power, there’s a way, there’s a system to do it. Shouldn’t be the executive branch, shouldn’t be executive orders.

Boo. But if Congress isn’t going to do anything, this is how, unfortunately, things are getting done in 2025. This is a complicated issue.

End of the day, what are you going to tell the people around your dinner table? They didn’t really decide anything on immigration. Nope.

They really decided. There’s this thing called an injunction, and the federal district courts had all this power, and now they don’t. And more importantly, this is going to impact so many areas of the law for the next three years for the Trump administration, because their executive orders aren’t going to be shut down immediately like they have been.

Huge. Most people at the dinner table are going to be like, what are you talking about? But you’ll know.

And if you want to know more about injunctions and how they work, listen to my previous episode where I talked ad nauseum about injunctions. Really fun immigration and legal issues are coming out of this administration. Be the smartest person at your dinner table.

Subscribe, share, and like. Immigration Weekly with yours truly, Rosanna Berardi. This was Immigration Weekly with Rosanna Berardi.

Thanks for joining. Be sure to connect with me, Rosanna Berardi, on LinkedIn, or go to our law firm at berardiimmigrationlaw.com. And if you don’t want to miss the latest and greatest, be sure to subscribe to the podcast and share this with your friends.

Subscribe to the Show on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Amazon Music, or YouTube. 

Connect with Rosanna Berardi on LinkedIn