Al Jazeera Podcasts.

Today, a new Supreme Court ruling leaves birthright citizenship hanging in the balance.

Now, what would happen is something that's completely illegal could and will go into effect for many, many months until it can eventually, if it ever gets to the Supreme Court.

What does the ruling mean for the power of the courts, the power of the presidency, and the rule of law in the United States?

I'm Kevin Horton, and this is the take.

My name is Leon Fresco. I'm the head of the immigration practice at Holland and Knight.

It's a law firm in Washington, D.C., and all

across the world, basically. And I am in Washington, D.C. today. Okay. Well, Leon, welcome to the take.

On Friday, the Supreme Court took aim at one of the judiciary's strongest breaks on executive power,

which is the nationwide injunction.

The Supreme Court has just released a potential landmark decision impacting the future of birthright citizenship in the U.S.

The justices were asked to roll back nationwide injunctions against the president's attempt to redefine the 14th Amendment.

Now, we see this a lot. The lower court

will freeze executive orders. They see us potentially unconstitutional. So why don't we start with

just breaking it down for us? What did the court decide and why do you think it matters?

What the court decided is that when a private litigant wants to sue and say that either that

executive order is illegal or that that regulation is illegal or even that that act of Congress

violated the Constitution, in any of those three scenarios, it is no longer the case that

one or two or three people can go to a court of law and say, I believe this is illegal.

And then that one judge in one location, let's say, you know, Los Angeles or Boston, can then say, yes, I agree with you that that memo or that regulation is illegal.

And not only am I going to prevent them from applying it to you, but I'm going to prevent the

government from applying this anywhere in the United States.

...