An important question has remained unresolved in the US judicial system for decades: Does a federal district judge have the authority to issue a “universal injunction” binding in all 50 states?
In 2025, the United States Supreme Court said no.
The ruling addresses three separate legal challenges to executive orders made by President Trump.
This means that a federal district judge does not have the constitutional authority to issue nationwide injunctions. Instead, a federal judge can only issue an injunction affecting the parties involved with litigation before the court.
Historical basis
The Court, in a 6-3 majority, based its decision on history.
It noted that “the first universal injunction was not issued until 1963 . . . and they remained rare until the turn of the 21st century when their use gradually accelerated. . . . One study identified approximately 127 universal injunctions issued during the 40-year period between 1963 and 2023.”
Further, the Court noted that “universal injunctions postdated the founding [of the country] by more than a century.”
The Court majority concluded that such history supports a narrow—rather than an expansive—application of universal injunctions.
What this means for churches
The relevance of this case to churches and clergy is illustrated by a case several years ago that threatened the viability of the ministerial housing allowance.
In 2013, a federal district court judge in Wisconsin struck down the ministerial housing allowance as an unconstitutional preference for religion.
The ruling was in response to a lawsuit brought by the Freedom from Religion Foundation (FFRF). The lawsuit challenged the constitutionality of the housing allowance and the parsonage
exclusion (Freedom From Religion Foundation, Inc. v. Lew, 983 F. Supp. 2d 1031 (W.D. Wis. 2013)).
The court issued a universal injunction banning application of the housing allowance by clergy in all 50 states, but it postponed its ruling pending an appeal to the US Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit.
The appeals court ultimately reversed the federal district court’s ruling, and the ministerial housing allowance remains legal and constitutional today.
Through the Supreme Court’s ruling, ministers now have additional peace of mind. They need not be concerned that the housing allowance exclusion may be lost at any time due to a future injunction by a lone federal district court judge.