President Trump Blocked in Federal Court

Yet another federal judge has issued a nationwide preliminary injunction against President Donald Trump’s Executive order to stop illegal immigration. U.S. District Judge Joseph Laplante announced that he will issue a written ruling later today. We will know the full extent of the injunction at that time.

And, yes, the U.S. Supreme Court just ruled on this very issue. In a 6-3 decision authored by Justice Amy Coney Barrett, the high Court ruled in favor of President Trump, blocking district judges from stopping the Administration’s agenda (agreeing with the arguments of the ACLJ’s amicus brief).

So how did a far-Left judge get around the Supreme Court’s ruling? In a nuanced loophole, the judge issued a class action certification to grant relief to a certain class of plaintiffs. However, as I mentioned earlier, without knowing the full written opinion, we can’t determine if the judge went too far.

In the majority opinion on this issue, Justice Amy Coney Barrett argued that nationwide injunctions are trying to find “shortcuts” around rules that have been in place for a long time – specifically, Rule 23 of Federal Civil Procedure, which centers on the rules for a class action lawsuit.

Justice Samuel Alito concurred with the majority opinion but also warned that such a loophole could exist. He pointed out:

Putting the kibosh on universal injunctions does nothing to disrupt Rule 23’s requirements. Of course, Rule 23 may permit the certification of nationwide classes in some discrete scenarios. But district courts should not view today’s decision as an invitation to certify nationwide classes without scrupulous adherence to the rigors of Rule 23. Otherwise, the universal injunction will return from the grave under the guise of “nationwide class relief,” and today’s decision will be of little more than minor academic interest.

Lax enforcement of the requirements for third-party standing and class certification would create a potentially significant loophole to today’s decision. Federal courts should thus be vigilant against such potential abuses of these tools.

So Justice Alito predicted that the far Left could exploit this loophole in the Supreme Court’s ruling. He knew what would be coming down the pike.

After the judge issues the full written opinion today, we can analyze the full ramifications of the injunction. And if the judge has gone too far, the ACLJ could respond. We will keep you updated.

We’ve already filed eight briefs in five federal courts against the outrageous lawsuits being leveled at President Trump – and we’re preparing to file our ninth in just days. Join our efforts by signing our petition to stop rogue activist judges from obstructing the Trump Administration’s agenda. You can also donate during our 35 Years of Justice Drive – all gifts are doubled.

Today’s Sekulow broadcast included a full analysis of a federal judge blocking Trump’s efforts to curb illegal immigration. ACLJ Senior Advisor for National Security and Foreign Policy Ric Grenell joined the broadcast to share about the previous Administration’s failures.

Watch the full broadcast below: