The gavel falls, the earth shifts, democracy shatters with a single last breath.

The United States of America is no longer one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Not after today.

The Supreme Court, in a 6-3 ruling, declared that a single federal judge can no longer halt an illegal executive order for the entire country.

Now, if a president breaks the law, the courts must stop him piece by piece—district by district, circuit by circuit—while the rest of the nation waits. And waits. And waits.

Justice Amy Coney Barrett, writing for the majority, called nationwide injunctions an overreach. "Federal courts do not exercise general oversight of the Executive Branch," she wrote, as if justice were a bureaucratic technicality rather than a shield against tyranny.

Justice Sonia Sotomayor, her voice cutting through the chamber, read her dissent aloud. "No right is safe," she warned.

She was right.

The case itself was about Trump’s executive order stripping birthright citizenship from the children of undocumented immigrants—a direct assault on the 14th Amendment, written to undo the stain of Dred Scott. But the Court didn’t rule on that.

Instead, it ruled on how the law could be enforced—or, more precisely, how it could be stopped.

It was abundantly clear that Trump's, "Executive Order violates the Fourteenth Amendment’s Citizenship Clause, §1, and §201 of the Nationality Act of 1940. In each case, the District Court entered a “universal injunction”—an injunction barring executive officials from applying the Executive Order to anyone, not just the plaintiffs. And in each case, the Court of Appeals denied the Government’s request to stay the sweeping relief."

In one swift ruling, the district court judge—upheld by the appellate court—blocked the president from violating the law and barred him from repeating the same illegal act in the future.

Now, if a president signs an illegal order, the fight must be waged 94 times over—once in every federal district—while the government picks off the weakest, the poorest, the least represented. Justice delayed is justice denied, and today, the Court made sure the delay would be long.

Lisa McCormick, the anti-establishment progressive who has spent years warning of democracy’s erosion, stood outside the courthouse in Newark, where another battle over executive overreach still smoldered.

"They’ve turned the law into a maze," said McCormick. "They know most people can’t afford to navigate it. They know most communities don’t have the resources to fight in every district. This isn’t about judicial restraint—it’s about letting tyranny move faster than justice."

"With one decisive ruling, upheld on appeal, the judge barred the president's unlawful act—and blocked its repetition," said McCormick. "Now the stacked Supreme Court has dismantled such nationwide protections, forcing justice to be won piecemeal across 94 courtrooms and 13 circuits."

"So much for liberty and justice for all," said McCormick.

She is right, too.

The 14th Amendment survived the Civil War. It survived Jim Crow. It survived a century and a half of political storms. But today, Trump's Supreme Court didn’t strike it down—it just made it harder to defend.

The ruling was procedural, technical, and dry. But the effect was visceral: A president can break the law in 93 districts before the courts catch up.

"The Supreme Court spoke today, and its words were cold," said McCormick. "Six against three, the numbers stark as a prison tally."

"The question was not whether the children of immigrants could be stripped of their birthright—not yet—but whether a single judge could stop the machinery of the state from grinding forward while the question was still being asked," said McCormick. "The answer, it turns out, is no."

One nation, divided.

The words of the Pledge of Allegiance now ring hollow. The Supreme Court has made sure of it.