Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. steered a deeply fractured Supreme Court through a term that simultaneously expanded executive authority in some areas while delivering major constitutional defeats to President Donald Trump during his second year back in the White House. Roberts, a solid conservative who consistently tries to keep the high court on a moderate middle course, successfully forged different coalitions to puncture Trump's assertions of limitless presidential power.
Among the most significant setbacks for the administration was a 6-3 ruling striking down Trump's worldwide tariffs. The justices determined that such import taxes are a matter for Congress to decide, not the executive branch. Trump reacted with fury to the decision, branding the majority justices a "disgrace to our nation" and "disloyal to the Constitution." He specifically targeted his own appointees, Justices Amy Coney Barrett and Neil Gorsuch, who joined Roberts in the majority, stating that they "sicken me." Washington attorney Roman Martinez, a former clerk for Roberts, characterized the tariff decision as the most important ruling of the year for a court that remains "clearly right of center."
In another major blow to the administration, the court threw out an executive order aimed at ending the principle of birthright citizenship. Trump had personally attended the court in April to hear his top attorney defend the order, departing after an hour of skeptical questioning from the bench. On the final day of the term, Roberts delivered a 26-page majority opinion affirming that the president cannot alter citizenship laws through executive decree.
Tracing the history of birthright citizenship, Roberts noted that the concept originated in England, crossed the Atlantic with the colonists, and was adopted with little fanfare after the American Revolution. He cited Justice Joseph Story, who wrote in 1830 that "nothing is better settled."
Roberts' opinion also addressed how the principle was temporarily disrupted by the fight over slavery. He wrote that in the "odious" decision of Dred Scott v. Sandford, the court imposed Southern states' beliefs on the nation by declaring that Black people could not be citizens. This ruling was condemned by figures like Abraham Lincoln and Frederick Douglass. Roberts noted that it took more than a decade—and the addition of historic battlefields like Antietam, Gettysburg, and Chancellorsville to the national canon—to fulfill Douglass's vision of "our common humanity." The Reconstruction Congress subsequently wrote this rule into the 14th Amendment, declaring all persons born in the United States to be citizens.
Roberts pointed out that this principle was upheld by the Supreme Court in 1898 and had remained unchallenged until Trump's return to office.
The birthright citizenship ruling drew fierce opposition from the court's right wing. But Thomas filed a 91-page dissent arguing that immigrants must be “domiciled” here before their children may become citizens. Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. authored a separate 39-page dissent, labeling Roberts' majority opinion a "serious mistake." Gorsuch joined Thomas and Alito in dissenting on two of the major rulings against the administration, including a December decision in which the court ruled that Trump lacked the authority to deploy National Guard troops onto the streets of Chicago.
Despite these defeats, Trump secured notable victories. The court's conservative majority ruled that the president has the authority to replace the top appointees of semi-independent agencies and remove any official wielding executive power, even if those officials have fixed terms set by law. The administration also prevailed on major immigration issues because Roberts and the conservative bloc agreed that Congress had delegated enforcement power to the executive.
The three liberal justices dissented angrily when the court ruled the administration may end Temporary Protected Status for Haitians and Syrians. In upholding the termination, the conservatives pointed to statutory language stating there shall be "no judicial review" of such decisions, over the objections of Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson.
However, the liberals joined Roberts in other critical 5-4 decisions. They aligned to affirm the independence of the Federal Reserve, blocking Trump's attempt to fire Fed Governor Lisa Cook. In another case, Justice Barrett joined Roberts and the three liberals to rule against the Republican National Committee, upholding state laws that permit the counting of late-arriving mail-in ballots. Additionally, Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh joined Roberts and the liberals in a 5-4 decision restricting the authority of police to use cellphone data to track criminal suspects.
Reflecting on the term, Harvard law professor Richard Lazarus, a law school classmate of Roberts, observed that the chief justice is working exceptionally hard to build consensus. Lazarus noted that formally presiding over a court where five members—Thomas, Alito, and Gorsuch on the right, and Sotomayor and Jackson on the left—frequently deride moderation and harshly condemn the chief when he strays from their views is no easy task.
Nonetheless, Stanford law professor Michael McConnell argued that the term's outcomes challenge accusations of bias, stating, "It's hard to claim the court is in Trump’s pocket when he lost the major cases." Following these final rulings, the Supreme Court adjourned for its summer recess.
David G. Savage has covered the Supreme Court and legal issues for the Los Angeles Times in the Washington bureau since 1986.
Today we discuss one of the pivotal events of the 1960s: the assassination of Robert F. Kennedy. Though the gunman was caught at the scene, confessed at trial, and even bragged about the shooting, his motives have largely been forgotten.
This is read by an automated voice. Please report any issues or inconsistencies here.
See more from the L.A. Times in Google Search. Set us as preferred
