They finally weighed in and it could change history.
In a monumental win for Trump, SCOTUS just shut down activist judges blocking his agenda.
The president wasted no time celebrating, delivering an impromptu press conference.
Then he dropped a MAJOR clue about what’s coming next for his policy.
🧵 THREAD
In a monumental win for Trump, SCOTUS just shut down activist judges blocking his agenda.
The president wasted no time celebrating, delivering an impromptu press conference.
Then he dropped a MAJOR clue about what’s coming next for his policy.
🧵 THREAD
📍 Don’t forget to bookmark this thread.
It could be the turning point for Trump’s presidency.
Let’s roll the clips and break it all down.
It could be the turning point for Trump’s presidency.
Let’s roll the clips and break it all down.
It was a defining moment for the Trump presidency.
For years, President Trump’s efforts to deliver on his campaign promises had been repeatedly blocked by activist judges, often from liberal districts, issuing sweeping nationwide injunctions that stalled policies voters had supported at the ballot box.
That pattern hit a wall today.
In a 6-3 decision, the Supreme Court ruled that Trump’s executive order restricting birthright citizenship can move forward in parts of the country, striking at the core of judges’ power to block presidential policies nationwide.
Justice Amy Coney Barrett, writing for the Court’s six Republican-appointed justices, made clear why the ruling mattered:
“These injunctions—known as ‘universal injunctions’—likely exceed the equitable authority that Congress has granted to federal courts.”
It was a significant legal win for Trump, delivering a long-awaited check on what his allies have described as a rogue judiciary determined to stymie his agenda.
As the decision hit the wires, CNN scrambled to break it down for viewers. Their senior legal analyst, Elie Honig, tried to summarize the ruling’s impact in real time.
“It looks like at first glimpse, and we're just starting, it looks like the court has put some limits on the ability of district courts, trial courts, to issue those kind of rulings,” Honig said.
He continued, “It looks like the court has said district courts only have the power to do that in certain, very narrow circumstances.”
“So we're going to go through this and get the details soon, but that's the gist.”
For years, President Trump’s efforts to deliver on his campaign promises had been repeatedly blocked by activist judges, often from liberal districts, issuing sweeping nationwide injunctions that stalled policies voters had supported at the ballot box.
That pattern hit a wall today.
In a 6-3 decision, the Supreme Court ruled that Trump’s executive order restricting birthright citizenship can move forward in parts of the country, striking at the core of judges’ power to block presidential policies nationwide.
Justice Amy Coney Barrett, writing for the Court’s six Republican-appointed justices, made clear why the ruling mattered:
“These injunctions—known as ‘universal injunctions’—likely exceed the equitable authority that Congress has granted to federal courts.”
It was a significant legal win for Trump, delivering a long-awaited check on what his allies have described as a rogue judiciary determined to stymie his agenda.
As the decision hit the wires, CNN scrambled to break it down for viewers. Their senior legal analyst, Elie Honig, tried to summarize the ruling’s impact in real time.
“It looks like at first glimpse, and we're just starting, it looks like the court has put some limits on the ability of district courts, trial courts, to issue those kind of rulings,” Honig said.
He continued, “It looks like the court has said district courts only have the power to do that in certain, very narrow circumstances.”
“So we're going to go through this and get the details soon, but that's the gist.”
With immediate reaction, constitutional legal titan Jonathan Turley weighed in on the significance of the legal victory handed down to President Trump from SCOTUS.
“Keep in mind when we watch President Trump at the upcoming event, what was at stake was still his legacy.”
“He went forward in a number of different ways to achieve the same results.”
“But what presidents have said is that when these individual judges do this, it takes us a couple of years often to run the course and reverse these things. Then we’re in the second half of our term.”
“We don’t have time to fulfill our promises to voters, this doesn’t make any sense.”
“Here the Supreme Court is agreeing with the Trump Administration that these judges are WELL past their authority given to them.”
“They need to cut back on these injunctions.”
“Keep in mind when we watch President Trump at the upcoming event, what was at stake was still his legacy.”
“He went forward in a number of different ways to achieve the same results.”
“But what presidents have said is that when these individual judges do this, it takes us a couple of years often to run the course and reverse these things. Then we’re in the second half of our term.”
“We don’t have time to fulfill our promises to voters, this doesn’t make any sense.”
“Here the Supreme Court is agreeing with the Trump Administration that these judges are WELL past their authority given to them.”
“They need to cut back on these injunctions.”
Just as the media was trying to keep up with the uproar over the Supreme Court limiting activist judges, the Court delivered another headline-grabbing decision.
It was a shot across the bow against the woke era.
In a second 6–3 ruling, the Supreme Court sided with a group of parents in Montgomery County, Maryland, who want the right to opt their children out of classroom lessons that include books with LGBTQ themes.
It was another HUGE win for religious rights advocates, who have often found a sympathetic ear in the Court’s conservative majority.
Justice Samuel Alito, writing for the six Republican-appointed justices, explained the Court’s reasoning:
“These parents have earned at least a preliminary injunction."
He added, “In the absence of an injunction, the parents will continue to be put to a choice: either risk their child’s exposure to burdensome instruction, or pay substantial sums for alternative educational services. As we have explained, that choice unconstitutionally burdens the parents’ religious exercise,”
It was a shot across the bow against the woke era.
In a second 6–3 ruling, the Supreme Court sided with a group of parents in Montgomery County, Maryland, who want the right to opt their children out of classroom lessons that include books with LGBTQ themes.
It was another HUGE win for religious rights advocates, who have often found a sympathetic ear in the Court’s conservative majority.
Justice Samuel Alito, writing for the six Republican-appointed justices, explained the Court’s reasoning:
“These parents have earned at least a preliminary injunction."
He added, “In the absence of an injunction, the parents will continue to be put to a choice: either risk their child’s exposure to burdensome instruction, or pay substantial sums for alternative educational services. As we have explained, that choice unconstitutionally burdens the parents’ religious exercise,”
Moments later, the president stepped up to the podium at the White House to celebrate what he called a historic victory.
It might be the most consequential Supreme Court ruling of Trump’s second term, clearing the path for his voter-backed agenda to move forward without repeated blocks from activist judges.
In his address, Trump unleashed on the significance of the moment:
“This morning the Supreme Court has delivered a monumental victory for the Constitution, the separation of powers, and the rule of law.”
He explained the stakes as he saw them:
“In striking down the excessive use of nationwide injunctions to interfere with the normal functioning of the executive branch, the Supreme Court has stopped the presidency itself.”
Reflecting on the public reaction, he said, “Really it’s been an amazing period of time this last hour.”
“There are people elated all over the country. I’ve seen such happiness in spirit. Sometimes you don’t see that. But this case is very important.”
He also made clear why he believed this fight mattered so much to voters:
“I was elected on a historic mandate, but in recent months we’ve seen a handful of radical left judges effectively try to overrule the rightful powers of the president to stop the American people from getting the policies that they’ve voted for in record numbers.”
Calling it a threat to the system itself, he reiterated: “It was a grave threat to democracy, frankly, and instead of merely ruling on the immediate cases before them, these judges have attempted to dictate the law for the entire nation.”
It might be the most consequential Supreme Court ruling of Trump’s second term, clearing the path for his voter-backed agenda to move forward without repeated blocks from activist judges.
In his address, Trump unleashed on the significance of the moment:
“This morning the Supreme Court has delivered a monumental victory for the Constitution, the separation of powers, and the rule of law.”
He explained the stakes as he saw them:
“In striking down the excessive use of nationwide injunctions to interfere with the normal functioning of the executive branch, the Supreme Court has stopped the presidency itself.”
Reflecting on the public reaction, he said, “Really it’s been an amazing period of time this last hour.”
“There are people elated all over the country. I’ve seen such happiness in spirit. Sometimes you don’t see that. But this case is very important.”
He also made clear why he believed this fight mattered so much to voters:
“I was elected on a historic mandate, but in recent months we’ve seen a handful of radical left judges effectively try to overrule the rightful powers of the president to stop the American people from getting the policies that they’ve voted for in record numbers.”
Calling it a threat to the system itself, he reiterated: “It was a grave threat to democracy, frankly, and instead of merely ruling on the immediate cases before them, these judges have attempted to dictate the law for the entire nation.”
The president then offered a clear signal about what this ruling really means for his agenda.
He explained that the Supreme Court’s decision to rein in rogue injunctions effectively opens the door to ending birthright citizenship and pushing forward his full slate of policies.
For Trump, it marked what he called a truly historic moment in his presidency—more than just a legal win, it was a green light to deliver on some of his biggest campaign promises.
Laying out what’s next, he told the country:
“Thanks for this decision and thanks to this decision we can now promptly file to proceed with numerous policies that have been wrongly enjoined on a nationwide basis.”
He was direct about one of the most controversial priorities:
“Some of the cases we're talking about would be ending birthright citizenship which now comes to the fore.”
Trump made his argument for why he believed that policy change is justified:
“That was meant for the babies of slaves, not meant for people trying to scam the system and come into the country on vacation.”
“This was the same date, the exact same date the end of the Civil War—it was meant for the babies of slaves, that is so clean and obvious.”
“This lets us go there and finally win that case because hundreds of thousands of people are pouring into our country under birthright citizenship and it wasn't meant for that reason.”
“It was meant for the babies of slaves.”
He didn’t stop there, listing other stalled policies he said could now move forward:
“So thanks to this decision we can now promptly file to proceed with these numerous policies and those that have been wrongly enjoined on a nationwide basis including birthright citizenship.”
“Ending sanctuary city funding.”
“Suspending refugee resettlement.”
“Freezing unnecessary funding.”
“Stopping federal taxpayers from paying for transgender surgeries, and numerous other priorities of the American people.”
He explained that the Supreme Court’s decision to rein in rogue injunctions effectively opens the door to ending birthright citizenship and pushing forward his full slate of policies.
For Trump, it marked what he called a truly historic moment in his presidency—more than just a legal win, it was a green light to deliver on some of his biggest campaign promises.
Laying out what’s next, he told the country:
“Thanks for this decision and thanks to this decision we can now promptly file to proceed with numerous policies that have been wrongly enjoined on a nationwide basis.”
He was direct about one of the most controversial priorities:
“Some of the cases we're talking about would be ending birthright citizenship which now comes to the fore.”
Trump made his argument for why he believed that policy change is justified:
“That was meant for the babies of slaves, not meant for people trying to scam the system and come into the country on vacation.”
“This was the same date, the exact same date the end of the Civil War—it was meant for the babies of slaves, that is so clean and obvious.”
“This lets us go there and finally win that case because hundreds of thousands of people are pouring into our country under birthright citizenship and it wasn't meant for that reason.”
“It was meant for the babies of slaves.”
He didn’t stop there, listing other stalled policies he said could now move forward:
“So thanks to this decision we can now promptly file to proceed with these numerous policies and those that have been wrongly enjoined on a nationwide basis including birthright citizenship.”
“Ending sanctuary city funding.”
“Suspending refugee resettlement.”
“Freezing unnecessary funding.”
“Stopping federal taxpayers from paying for transgender surgeries, and numerous other priorities of the American people.”
That’s when Attorney General Pam Bondi took the stage to drive the message home.
She went scorched earth as she reacted to the Supreme Court’s historic decision.
“Judges have tried to seize the executive branch’s power. NO longer.”
As the nation’s top law enforcement officer, Bondi delivered what was essentially a scorched-earth response to the Court’s ruling that shut down the use of nationwide injunctions by lower-court judges.
“Americans are finally getting what they voted for.”
She issued a blunt warning to the judiciary:
“Two words to the judges: no longer.”
She spelled out exactly what that means moving forward:
“No longer will we have rogue judges striking down President Trump’s policies across the entire nation. No longer.”
Bondi pointed to the Supreme Court’s clear finding in the 6–3 opinion:
“Today in the 6-3 opinion, Barrett correctly holds that the district court lacks authority to enter nationwide or universal injunctions.”
She highlighted how sweeping these injunctions had become:
“These lawless injunctions gave relief to everyone in the world instead of the parties before the court.”
She continued, “As the Supreme Court held today, they turned district courts into the imperial judiciary. Activist liberal judges have used these injunctions to block virtually ALL of President Trump’s policies.”
Detailing just how concentrated the problem was, she explained, “94 districts and 35 out of the 40 opinions with nationwide injunctions came from five liberal districts in this country. No longer.”
Bondi closed with a final, emphatic line:
“These injunctions have blocked our policies from tariffs to military readiness to immigration to foreign affairs, fraud, abuse and many other issues.”
And her last words left no doubt about the administration’s stance:
“The judges have tried to seize the executive branch’s power and they cannot do that. No longer.”
She went scorched earth as she reacted to the Supreme Court’s historic decision.
“Judges have tried to seize the executive branch’s power. NO longer.”
As the nation’s top law enforcement officer, Bondi delivered what was essentially a scorched-earth response to the Court’s ruling that shut down the use of nationwide injunctions by lower-court judges.
“Americans are finally getting what they voted for.”
She issued a blunt warning to the judiciary:
“Two words to the judges: no longer.”
She spelled out exactly what that means moving forward:
“No longer will we have rogue judges striking down President Trump’s policies across the entire nation. No longer.”
Bondi pointed to the Supreme Court’s clear finding in the 6–3 opinion:
“Today in the 6-3 opinion, Barrett correctly holds that the district court lacks authority to enter nationwide or universal injunctions.”
She highlighted how sweeping these injunctions had become:
“These lawless injunctions gave relief to everyone in the world instead of the parties before the court.”
She continued, “As the Supreme Court held today, they turned district courts into the imperial judiciary. Activist liberal judges have used these injunctions to block virtually ALL of President Trump’s policies.”
Detailing just how concentrated the problem was, she explained, “94 districts and 35 out of the 40 opinions with nationwide injunctions came from five liberal districts in this country. No longer.”
Bondi closed with a final, emphatic line:
“These injunctions have blocked our policies from tariffs to military readiness to immigration to foreign affairs, fraud, abuse and many other issues.”
And her last words left no doubt about the administration’s stance:
“The judges have tried to seize the executive branch’s power and they cannot do that. No longer.”
Huge shout-out to @overton_news for cutting together that last clip in this thread.
If you’re into truth-seeking news accounts like mine, they’re definitely worth a follow!
—> @overton_news
If you’re into truth-seeking news accounts like mine, they’re definitely worth a follow!
—> @overton_news
@overton_news Thanks for reading!
If you appreciate my work, the most effective way to support it is to sign up for news alerts at or subscribe to this page on X.
Your monthly subscription goes further than you think. Thank you so much for your support.vigilantfox.com
If you appreciate my work, the most effective way to support it is to sign up for news alerts at or subscribe to this page on X.
Your monthly subscription goes further than you think. Thank you so much for your support.vigilantfox.com
@overton_news For more in-depth stories the mainstream won’t touch, follow me on 𝕏.
—> @VigilantFox
Looking for something else to read?
Leavitt Dismantles CNN’s Narrative on Trump’s Iran Strikes Within Minutes
—> @VigilantFox
Looking for something else to read?
Leavitt Dismantles CNN’s Narrative on Trump’s Iran Strikes Within Minutes
https://x.com/VigilantFox/status/1938002508171120698
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
