Amy Coney Barrett Criticizes Ketanji Brown Jackson’s Dissent in 6-3 Supreme Court Ruling on Nationwide Injunctions and Birthright Citizenship

Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett authored the majority opinion in a ruling that limits the ability of U.S. District Judges to issue nationwide injunctions. In her opinion, Barrett sharply criticized Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson's dissent, describing it as contrary to more than two centuries of legal precedent and the Constitution. Barrett accused Jackson of decrying an "imperial Executive" while embracing an "imperial Judiciary," highlighting a perceived inconsistency in Jackson's judicial philosophy.

Barrett also suggested that Jackson failed to engage seriously with legal precedent, dismissing it as "boring 'legalese.'" This rebuke was part of a broader clash between the conservative and liberal justices over the scope of judicial authority, including in cases related to birthright citizenship and executive power. The ruling was decided 6-3, with Barrett leading the majority. The exchanges between Barrett and Jackson have drawn attention for their directness and the intensity of Barrett's critique of Jackson's legal reasoning.