Supreme Court Can End Unconstitutional Nationwide Orders from Radical Lower Court Judges This Week

The Supreme Court has a chance to end unconstitutional nationwide orders from radical lower court judges this week. 

President Trump shared on Truth Social:

Unlawful Nationwide Injunctions by Radical Left Judges could very well lead to the destruction of our Country! These people are Lunatics, who do not care, even a little bit, about the repercussions from their very dangerous and incorrect Decisions and Rulings. Lawyers endlessly search the United States for these Judges, and file lawsuits as quickly as they find them. It is then the obligation of Law abiding Agencies of Government to have these “Orders” overturned. The danger is unparalleled! These Judges want to assume the Powers of the Presidency, without having to attain 80 Million Votes. They want all of the advantages with none of the risks. Again, a President has to be allowed to act quickly and decisively about such matters as returning murderers, drug lords, rapists, and other such type criminals back to their Homeland, or to other locations that will allow our Country to be SAFE. It is our goal to MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN, and such a high aspiration can never be done if Radical and Highly Partisan Judges are allowed to stand in the way of JUSTICE. STOP NATIONWIDE INJUNCTIONS NOW, BEFORE IT IS TOO LATE. If Justice Roberts and the United States Supreme Court do not fix this toxic and unprecedented situation IMMEDIATELY, our Country is in very serious trouble!

This week the Supreme Court is expected to rule on nationwide challenges by corrupt judges.  John Sexton at HotAir shared the following:

The Constitution empowers Congress to create lower federal courts, and in designing a system of 93 judicial districts and 12 regional circuits, Congress set clear geographic limits on lower-court jurisdiction. In our system, district-court rulings do not bind other judges, even other judges in the same district…

Nationwide injunctions not only allow district courts to wield unprecedented power, they also allow district courts to wield it asymmetrically. When a court denies a nationwide injunction, the decision does not affect other cases. But when a court grants a nationwide injunction, it renders all other litigation on the issue largely irrelevant. Think about what that means for the Government. When Congress passes a statute or the President implements a policy that is challenged in multiple courts, the Government has to run the table—we must win every case. The challengers, however, must find only one district judge—out of an available 600—willing to enter a nationwide injunction. One judge can, in effect, cancel the policy with the stroke of the pen.

…And the era of nationwide injunctions could come to an end later this week when the Supreme Court hears a case on birthright citizenship. The case probably won’t decide whether birthright citizenship is legal under the 14th Amendment. What the case is really about is the nationwide injunctions different courts have used to block Trump’s executive order on the topic.

…based on the Trump administration’s request for emergency intervention and the limited filings at this point, the justices are likely to decide an important procedural issue, rather than directly decide who’s entitled to citizenship…

The method invoked against the Trump administration is known as a “nationwide injunction,” when a single US district court judge blocks enforcement of a government action not merely in the judge’s district but throughout the country. Administration lawyers have urged the justices to narrow the injunctions to cover only those parties to the cases.

Will the Supreme Court get this right or will they add to the problems with our courts?