If you ask God for help and if you have patience, He will renew your faith.

On Thursday, after months of shredding the Constitution by substituting their own imaginary authority for that of President Donald Trump, Democrats and their rogue, activist, lower-court federal judges received a historic smackdown from the Supreme Court, which ruled 6-3 that those lower-court judges lack the power to issue the kind of nationwide injunctions they have consistently used in order to undermine Trump’s agenda.

“For good reason,” Justice Clarence Thomas wrote in a concurring opinion, “the Court today puts an end to the ‘increasingly common’ practice of federal courts issuing universal injunctions.”

Having spent my entire academic career researching and teaching the history of the early United States, in particular the era of the American Founding, I can declare without hyperbole that this ruling achieved nothing less than the salvation of the Constitution. It carries that much importance.

“The Court also makes clear that the complete-relief principle provides a ceiling on federal courts’ authority, which must be applied alongside other ‘principles of equity’ and our holding that universal injunctions are impermissible,” Thomas added.

Inject it straight into my veins: “a ceiling on federal courts’ authority.”

“Lower courts should carefully heed this Court’s guidance and cabin their grants of injunctive relief in light of historical equitable limits. If they cannot do so, this Court will continue to be ‘dutybound’ to intervene,” Thomas concluded.

We do not sufficiently marvel at the Founders’ achievement. After all, they created a system in which, 236 years after the Constitution’s ratification, patriots like Thomas have so much reverence for that document’s limiting principles that they boldly declare limits to the authority of their own branch of government.

Where else in world history do we find such reverence for the restraints imposed by the people on their rulers? It is a wondrous thing.

In any event, June 27, 2025, should live on as a sublime date in the annals of the republic.

It comes as no surprise, of course, that Thomas played a leading role in rescuing the Constitution.

More shocking, however, is the fact that the entire conservative court covered itself in glory.

Consider, for instance, Justice Amy Coney Barrett’s majority opinion.

Buried deep in that opinion, one finds a passage in which Barrett took aim at fellow Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, whose dissenting opinion dismissed limits on judicial power as a “mind-numbingly technical query.”

“We will not dwell on JUSTICE JACKSON’s argument, which is at odds with more than two centuries’ worth of precedent, not to mention the Constitution itself,” Barrett wrote two paragraphs later. “We observe only this: JUSTICE JACKSON decries an imperial Executive while embracing an imperial Judiciary.”

Barrett, of course, has sometimes proven frustrating to Trump supporters. Those words, however, rank among the greatest ever penned by a member of SCOTUS.

Indeed, federal judges’ brazen efforts to stymie Trump by issuing universal injunctions represented the worst constitutional crisis of my lifetime.

Moreover, the Trump administration’s search for a remedy via that same corrupt court system struck me as timid and anti-constitutional. A better approach, in my view, would have involved asserting the Executive branch’s co-equal standing and then ignoring the judges.

The situation was so bad, in fact, that if allowed to stand it would have meant the end of self-government. Elections would have meant nothing, for elites could always overrule the people’s will simply by finding one unscrupulous federal judge.

Friday’s ruling, however, vindicated the Trump administration.

In short, SCOTUS restored the Constitution’s separation of powers, not to mention my personal faith in the republic.

Advertise with The Western Journal and reach millions of highly engaged readers, while supporting our work. Advertise Today.