Justice Samuel Alito’s concerns about potential loopholes in the Supreme Court’s decision to limit universal injunctions are gaining attention as they apply to ongoing lawsuits involving President Donald Trump. In his concurring opinion in the case Trump v. CASA, Alito highlighted the risks of judges using alternative legal tools—such as class action lawsuits—to replicate the effects of nationwide injunctions. Alito warned that these tools could undermine the Court’s ruling if not closely monitored, emphasizing the need for vigilance to prevent widespread legal abuses.
Lower courts are already testing the boundaries of these restrictions. Judge Randolph Moss, an Obama appointee in Washington, D.C., recently ruled that Trump’s proclamation declaring an “invasion” at the border was unlawful, effectively setting it aside under the Administrative Procedure Act. Though not a universal injunction, the ruling had a similar impact, exempting over a dozen potential asylees from the policy. The Trump administration swiftly appealed, with Attorney General Pam Bondi condemning Moss as a “rogue district court judge” attempting to sidestep the Court’s recent decision.
Alito’s warning extends to states that may seek statewide relief through legal actions. He noted that if judges are not careful, states—particularly those led by Democrats—could file lawsuits on behalf of their residents to obtain broader equitable relief. This could allow for sweeping injunctions that exempt entire states from Trump’s policies, effectively replicating the effects of a universal injunction. Alito stressed the importance of strict adherence to procedural rules, such as Rule 23, to prevent this exploitation. Otherwise, he argued, the Court’s decision on universal injunctions would lose its practical impact, reduced to mere academic interest.
As the legal battle over Trump’s policies continues, Alito’s concerns highlight the tension between judicial discretion and the need for legal consistency. His warning serves as a reminder that the Court’s recent ruling on universal injunctions may face significant challenges if lower courts and plaintiffs find ways to circumvent its restrictions. The administration’s frustration with recent rulings suggests that the legal battle over Trump’s policies is far from over, with potential long-term implications for judicial power and executive authority.