WASHINGTON, D.C. — The Supreme Court issued major rulings in June expanding state power over immigrants, federal agencies and oppressed people, including decisions allowing the Trump regime to end protections for hundreds of thousands of immigrants and restrict asylum processing. Even where the court rejected parts of Trump’s program, its overall direction strengthened the Old State’s machinery of deportation, exclusion and executive power.
The Supreme Court is an extremely important site of political power in the U.S., having final say on all court cases pertaining to federal legislation. The court is currently made up of six conservatives, three of which were appointed directly by Trump, and three liberals. Trump’s appointees were hand-selected by the Federalist Society, a reactionary legislative organization funded by the bourgeoisie.
Ruling on Birthright Citizenship (Trump v. Barbara)
The Supreme Court ruled in a 6-3 opinion against Trump in this case, reaffirming the 14th Amendment’s provision granting U.S. citizenship to anyone born in the U.S., a significant defeat for Trump’s immigration program. On the first day of his second term, Trump issued an executive order ending birthright citizenship for those born to undocumented migrants or those on temporary visas. This executive order never went into effect, however, due to immediate and strong opposition in all lower federal courts, which found it to be blatantly unconstitutional, and contrary to the legal consensus that has existed for 160 years. The Supreme Court agreed with the consensus from the lower courts.
The reactionary Justice Brett Kavanaugh, nominated by Trump in 2018 and confirmed by the Senate amidst controversy over allegations that Kavanaugh committed sexual assault, only partially agreed with the majority opinion. He held that Trump’s executive order did not violate the 14th Amendment, but did violate the Immigration and Nationality Act, meaning that in his view, the executive order’s restrictions on birthright citizenship could be passed through Congress amending the law. This grants the Republican Party a possible avenue through which it could end the precedent of birthright citizenship; one act codifying Trump’s executive order has already been introduced in the House of Representatives.
Transgender Sports Ban (Little v. Hecox, West Virginia v. B.P.J.)
In a major reactionary ruling extending the Old State’s campaign against LGBTQ+ youth, the court allowed state bans on transgender girls and women in girls’ and women’s school sports. While the ruling specifically pertains to laws passed in Idaho and West Virginia, 25 other states have already passed legislation with the same purpose. Despite how important the trans sports issue has become to the conservative agenda, it actually concerns very few cases in the country, with the president of the NCAA telling Congress that he was only aware of about 10 transgender athletes on campus teams. Likewise, although the conservative narrative covers their prejudice towards LGBTQ+ people with a veneer of “science,” it is entirely based on ideology. The relevant scientific research indicates that transgender people have no inherent advantage over cisgender people in athletics, not to mention the veiled misogyny in claiming that those assigned male at birth are inherently superior in all sports to those assigned female at birth.
The ruling sets the precedent that Title IX, which prohibits sex-based discrimination in education, does not apply to transgender people. This dangerous precedent opens the door for transgender youth to face discrimination in education, as well as other areas. Already last year, the court upheld a law in Tennessee banning medical professionals from providing gender affirming care to minors. The campaign against transgender people is seen by reactionaries as only the first step in overturning protections for all LGBTQ+ people at all levels.
Federal Firing Power (Trump v. Slaughter, Trump v. Cook)
In Trump v. Slaughter, the court expanded the president’s power to remove heads of independent agencies such as the FTC without cause. This overturns a 90-year precedent, established in 1935, of members of regulatory agencies established by Congress being protected from being removed by the Executive Branch without cause. The new decision strengthens the control of the central executive over federal agencies.
However, in Trump v. Cook, the court blocked Trump from firing Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook, treating the Federal Reserve as a special exception from the broader attack on independent agencies. In analysis, the Federal Reserve is critical for the continued functioning of the U.S. capitalist economy, so there is interest among the bourgeoisie to shield it from the Trump regime’s erratic whims. Other agencies, originally set up to restrict corporations from exercising ultimate power, can be more detrimental to corporate profits and are therefore not granted this protection.
Temporary Protected Status and Asylum (Mullin v. Doe, Miot v. Trump)
The court allowed the Trump regime to end Temporary Protected Status for Haitian and Syrian immigrants and turn away asylum seekers who had not yet crossed into the United States. Temporary Protected Status is a designation given to some immigrants from countries experiencing severe conditions such as armed conflict or natural disasters.
Immigrants from Haiti gained Temporary Protected Status after a 2010 earthquake that killed more than 300,000 people. Elections were last held in 2016. Since 2018, Haiti has experienced a severe political, economic, and political crisis. Haiti has not had a parliament since 2023; it is officially ruled by a “Transitional Presidential Council,” but in reality, the country is controlled by rival criminal gangs. Since Trump’s 2024 campaign, he has launched a propaganda campaign targeting Haitian immigrants, with the “pet-eating” hoax and Noem using dehumanizing language against them.
Haiti’s severe, persistent crisis is not a random event; it resulted from its status as a semi-colony of the U.S. As early as 1868, the U.S. had suggested annexing Haiti. While this was temporarily taken off the table, Haiti was forced to become economically dependent and indebted to the U.S. throughout the 1800s. Ultimately, the U.S. would use its military to occupy Haiti from 1915 to 1934 to protect its financial interests, with further military interventions in 1994 and 2004. More than 350,000 Haitians residing in the U.S. are currently under TPS. The decision clears the way for their status to be terminated on July 24.
Syria was designated as TPS in 2012 following massive political violence in a civil war activated by American interference in the country, signified by the transfer of weapons to various extremist militias fighting the Ba’athist state (and often each other). Trump’s Secretary of Homeland Security, Kristi Noem, removed Syria’s status after the Ba’athist government fell and was replaced by the HTS government, led by the leader of an al-Qaeda affiliate group who now benefits from U.S. backing. By then, 50,000 Syrian refugees had gained asylum in the U.S, with around 4,000 being under TPS.
Both rulings set the precedent that courts have no place in reviewing terminations of TPS designations. Throughout 2025 and 2026, the Trump regime sought to terminate TPS for immigrants from Ethiopia, Haiti, Myanmar, Somalia, South Sudan, Syria, Venezuela, and Yemen. While court action delayed these terminations, the new rulings give Trump the green light to remove legal status for nearly a million refugees from these countries.
Campaign Finance (National Republican Senatorial Committee v. FEC)
The court struck down limits on coordinated spending between parties and candidates, further opening bourgeois elections to ruling-class money. By a 6-3 vote, the court ruled that a 1974 law (Federal Election Campaign Act) limiting electoral spending was a violation of First Amendment rights, overturning a 2001 Supreme Court decision.
In the widely criticized 2010 Citizens United decision, the court ruled that political spending by corporations, non-profits, and labor unions is free speech, and therefore protected by the First Amendment, and immune from the Federal Election Campaign Act. This resulted in outside election spending increasing from around $600 million in the 2008 cycle to $4.5 billion in 2024, giving the bourgeoisie even more influence over the election system.
The recent ruling further weakens federal legislation intended to prevent corruption in election spending. It allows individual donors to donate unlimited amounts to political candidates, as long as it is channeled through a political party, clearing the way for further bourgeois influence and corruption in the election system.
The Political Content of the Rulings
Overall, the Supreme Court’s rulings issued in June are the latest step on the path of fascistization in the United States. The decisions tended towards strengthening the power of the executive branch and the deterioration of parliamentarism, and especially strengthens the “unitary executive theory” which grants absolute power of the executive branch in the President. Concretely, the decisions granted the Old State to remove a significant number of immigrants residing in the U.S., as ICE’s current terror campaign across the country has already harmed countless people, including murdering ten people. They also grant the Old State the ability to discriminate against LGBTQ+ people, especially transgender people, and allow further unchecked bourgeois control over the supposedly democratic election system.
