GET THE APP
Monday, February 23, 2026

Tag: Amy Coney Barrett
May 15, 2025
Immigration
Lawfare

Once Again, Amy Coney Barrett is Helping the Far-Left.

PULSE POINTS:

❓What Happened: Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett sided with her liberal colleague, Justice Elena Kagan, and pressed Solicitor General John Sauer over the Trump White House’s position on whether there are instances when lower federal courts can issue nationwide actions blocking executive branch actions.

👥 Who’s Involved: Justice Amy Coney Barrett, Justice Elena Kagan, Solicitor General John Sauer, and the U.S. Supreme Court.

📍 Where & When: U.S. Supreme Court, on Thursday, May 15, 2025, during oral arguments in a landmark birthright citizenship case.

💬 Key Quote: Justice Barrett asked Sauer, “Are you really going to answer Justice Kagan by saying there’s no way to do this expeditiously?”

⚠️ Impact: The case involves challenges to injunctions against President Donald J. Trump’s executive order on ending birthright citizenship, potentially affecting nationwide legal precedents.

IN FULL:

Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett pressed Solicitor General John Sauer during oral arguments on Thursday as the Court reviewed a series of cases challenging injunctions against President Donald J. Trump’s Executive Order aimed at ending birthright citizenship. The cases—Trump v. CASA, Trump v. Washington, and Trump v. New Jersey—center on whether nationwide injunctions issued by lower courts were appropriate in blocking the executive order.

The justices debated the procedural and legal frameworks surrounding the matter, with liberal Justice Elena Kagan questioning Sauer on how the Court could rule on the issue without allowing nationwide injunctions. Kagan, during the session, asked Sauer to assume the executive order was “dead wrong” and explain how the judiciary could address the matter efficiently: “And, you know, look, there are all kinds of abuses of nationwide injunctions, but I think that the question that this case presents is… it’s quite clear that the EO is illegal; how does one get to that result, in what time frame on your set of rules without the possibility of a nationwide injunction?”

“On this case and on many similar cases, the appropriate way to do it is for there to be multiple lower courts considering it, the appropriate percolation that goes to the lower courts, and then ultimately this court decides the merits in a nationwide binding precedent,” Sauer replied, arguing: “You have a complete inversion of that through the nationwide injunctions with a district court.”

At this point, Justice Barrett intervened and, in an exasperated tone, pressed Sauer: “Are you really going to answer Justice Kagan by saying there’s no way to do this expeditiously?” Barrett went on to push Sauer on whether forming a class of individual plaintiffs could resolve the matter more quickly. President Trump’s Solicitor General said that class certification could expedite the process, though he noted it had not been briefed in the lower courts.

Justice Barrett’s line of questioning marks the latest instance of the Trump-appointed jurist siding with the high court’s leftist faction over her more conservative colleagues. Notably, Barrett is among the bloc of justices that have upheld several injunctions against President Trump’s actions to remove illegal immigrants from the United States.

show less

PULSE POINTS:

show more
March 19, 2024
William Upton
Immigration

SCOTUS Reverses, Now WILL Allow Texas to Protect Border.

Supreme Court Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett ruled Tuesday to lift the administrative stay upheld on Monday by Justice Samuel Alito, which blocked Texas from enforcing SB4, a newly introduced immigration law. The law enables local law enforcement to detain migrants and empowers state judges to order deportations.

The two justices issued an order vacating the prior order by Justice Alito, noting that the legislative pause enacted on behalf of the Biden Department of Justice by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals was not a ‘stay pending appeal.’ Instead, the two justices concluded the stay was administrative in nature as the circuit court had cited its docket management authority.

President Joe Biden’s Department of Justice contends that the power to make and enforce immigration law is solely reserved in the Constitution to the federal government. Texas has countered that constitutional provisions afford state governments latitude on immigration law when the federal government is unable or refuses to enforce security at the border.

While a temporary freeze halted the law’s execution in early March, following a preemptive lawsuit from the Biden government, the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that it would go into effect on March 10 if the Supreme Court declined to intervene. Justice Alito ordered a second emergency stay request on Monday. Tuesday’s order from justices Kavanaugh and Barrett has vacated Alito’s order.

While the justices have lifted the stay, they have yet to rule on the actual merits of the case.

show less
Supreme Court Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett ruled Tuesday to lift the administrative stay upheld on Monday by Justice Samuel Alito, which blocked Texas from enforcing SB4, a newly introduced immigration law. The law enables local law enforcement to detain migrants and empowers state judges to order deportations. show more
January 22, 2024
Immigration
News
Politics

SCOTUS Says Biden Govt Can Take Down Texas’ Border Barrier.

In a high-stakes decision on Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court sided with the Biden government, permitting Border Patrol officers to remove concertina wire installed along Texas’s border with Mexico. Texas Governor Greg Abbott erected the fencing in response to the Biden administration’s lack of border security enforcement.

The makeshift barrier was part of Texas’s effort to impede the invasion of migrants crossing the border since Biden took office. The fencing measure and an order by Gov. Abbott to seize a public park situated on the border in Eagle Pass created an intensifying standoff between the federal agents and the state of Texas.

The Supreme Court’s decision was close, resulting in a 5-4 split in favor of the emergency appeal filed by the Biden government, which objected to a previous appellate ruling in favor of Texas. Chief Justice Roberts cast the critical vote that tipped the scales toward the majority. Justices Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch, and Kavanaugh all registered their dissent.

Rounding out the court’s vote count, Justice Amy Coney Barrett — a Trump appointee — sided with the majority. Both Roberts and Barrett appear to have been swayed by arguments favoring the federal government’s constitutional authority over the U.S. border.

show less
In a high-stakes decision on Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court sided with the Biden government, permitting Border Patrol officers to remove concertina wire installed along Texas's border with Mexico. Texas Governor Greg Abbott erected the fencing in response to the Biden administration's lack of border security enforcement. show more