Trump v. CASA
| Trump v. CASA, Inc. | |
|---|---|
| Argued May 15, 2025 Decided June 27, 2025 | |
| Full case name | Donald J. Trump, President of the United States, et al., Applicants v. CASA, Inc., et al. |
| Docket no. | 24A884 |
| Citations | 606 U.S. 831 (more) |
| Argument | Oral argument |
| Decision | Opinion |
| Questions presented | |
| Can a district court issue a nationwide (universal) injunction that blocks enforcement of a federal executive order beyond the specific parties involved in the lawsuit? | |
| Holding | |
| Universal injunctions likely exceed the equitable authority that Congress has given to federal courts. | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Barrett, joined by Roberts, Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh |
| Concurrence | Thomas, joined by Gorsuch |
| Concurrence | Alito, joined by Thomas |
| Concurrence | Kavanaugh |
| Dissent | Sotomayor, joined by Kagan, Jackson |
| Dissent | Jackson |
| Laws applied | |
| Judiciary Act of 1789 | |
| Part of a series on the |
| Immigration policy of the second Trump administration |
|---|
Trump v. CASA, Inc., 606 U.S. 831 (2025), is a United States Supreme Court case addressing whether lower-court judges have the authority to issue "universal injunctions" to block the enforcement of policies nationwide. On June 27, 2025, the Court ruled in a 6–3 decision that universal injunctions exceed the judiciary power unless necessary to provide the formal plaintiff with "complete relief". Writing for the majority, Justice Amy Coney Barrett emphasized that "complete relief" for a plaintiff was distinct from "universal relief" impacting all similar situations nationwide.
While the case did not directly address birthright citizenship in the United States, it centered on several universal injunctions blocking Executive Order 14160, an order issued by President Donald Trump to redefine the government's understanding of the Citizenship Clause. Three district court judges issued universal preliminary injunctions to block the order nationwide while cases that they presided over proceeded through the legal system.
The government appealed each case to the Supreme Court, arguing that district judges should only be allowed to prevent a policy from taking effect for the specific challengers filing a given lawsuit. The Supreme Court consolidated the appeals into Trump v. CASA. In its ruling, the Court issued partial stays on existing injunctions except for those that were parties to the cases.
The opinion did not address the constitutionality of the birthright citizenship executive order and left open the ability for plaintiffs to pursue class-wide relief through class action lawsuits.