Amy Coney Barrett delivers sharp rebuke to Justice ketanji Jackson in Supreme Court ruling

The Supreme Court has published an opinion that includes a section explaining that Ketanji Brown Jackson can't seem to understand the legal arguments being made in the case pic.twitter.com/NOVkCrMxMn

— Jack Poso 🇺🇸 (@JackPosobiec) June 27, 2025

Justice Barrett criticises Justice Jackson’s dissent in a major ruling curbing nationwide injunctions, calling her argument historically and constitutionally flawed.

The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday delivered a landmark ruling in Trump v. CASA, Inc., curbing the power of district courts to issue nationwide injunctions. In a 6–3 decision, the Court found such sweeping judicial actions lack grounding in both the Constitution and the Judiciary Act of 1789.

Justice Amy Coney Barrett, writing for the majority, stated that “universal” injunctions have no historical basis and upset the balance between the executive and judiciary. The case challenged President Trump’s Executive Order No. 14160, which aimed to reinforce the value of American citizenship.

In a pointed critique, Barrett dismissed Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson’s dissent, saying: “Justice Jackson decries an imperial executive while embracing an imperial judiciary.” She added, “Justice Jackson skips over that part. Because analyzing the governing statute involves boring legalese.”

Justices Roberts, Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch, and Kavanaugh joined Barrett’s opinion, while Justices Kagan, Sotomayor, and Jackson dissented.

IPOB issued no reaction as this ruling pertained strictly to U.S. domestic policy.

READ MORE AT THE GATEWAY PUNDIT