The Court should be beyond reproach. But sometimes you can’t help but point out their failures.
Now Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan received a brutal takedown from the last place imaginable.
Jennings’ Critique on CNN NewsNight
On June 27, during a CNN NewsNight panel, Republican commentator Scott Jennings challenged Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan’s consistency on nationwide injunctions.
He shared a video on X, captioned, “Does anyone remember Justice Kagan being against nationwide injunctions when we had a DEMOCRAT President? Pepperidge Farms remembers.”
Host Abby Phillip noted bipartisan frustration with nationwide injunctions—lower court rulings that apply nationwide—when used against favored presidents, stating, “The nationwide injunction is officially dead and the court taking an opportunity here to do something that a lot of conservatives, perhaps, have wanted for a while. But, as we’ve discussed plenty of times, the nationwide injunction has been sort of the bane of the existence of Democrat and Republican presidents. It’s just that now this court has actually done it.”
Jennings, who has described the judiciary’s restraint of President Trump as a “constitutional crisis,” praised the ruling.
“Yeah, they’ve finally done something about it. Friday was a great day for Donald Trump. The market ended at all-time highs. He’s breaking peace agreements in the Oval Office on a Friday afternoon. And then the court really clears the way for him to enact the agenda on which he ran,” he said, referencing the S&P 500’s record high and Trump’s role in a recent Middle East ceasefire.
Kagan’s Contradiction and Ruling’s Impact
Jennings cited Kagan’s 2022 comment, “It just can’t be right that one District Judge can stop a nationwide policy in its tracks,” made during a Democratic administration, contrasting it with her dissent in the Trump v. CASA, Inc. ruling.
“Now she voted against the decision on Friday. Just goes to show you that some of these folks really are hacks,” he said.
The decision limited injunctions that blocked 25 of Trump’s executive actions from January to April, per Congressional Research Service data, enabling policies like ending birthright citizenship.
Jennings concluded, “But as you correctly said, this has been the bane of existence of presidents and I’m glad they went ahead and fixed it because it’s not right that one of these individual district court judges can act like a king or a monarch and stop the elected president from acting.”
X posts showed mixed reactions, with some users supporting the ruling for limiting judicial power and others arguing it risks unchecked executive authority.
Debate Over Judicial and Executive Power
The ruling has fueled discussions on balancing judicial and executive authority. Kagan’s shift has drawn scrutiny for perceived partisanship, while Trump’s recent successes, including trade deals and NATO commitments, amplify the ruling’s significance.
The decision reshapes how courts interact with executive actions, impacting Trump’s agenda and future administrations.
