By Phillip T. KellyIn 2025, the Supreme Court of the United States rejected “universal injunctions” (also known as “nationwide injunctions”) as an equitable remedy given by Congress to federal courts. See Trump, et al v. Casa, Inc.,et al., 606 U.S. 831 (2025). District courts may no longer issue an injunction that operates to bar a law across all jurisdictions and as to all people. This type of relief, the Supreme Court reasons, is contrary to traditional notions of equity as it allows federal courts to adjudicate cases that impact non-parties—those not named as plaintiffs in the subject litigation. Injunctions were traditionally used as a means for restraining a defendant’s actions against particular plaintiff(s)—not those who are not parties to the suit.
Although the Supreme Court has rejected universal injunctions, plaintiffs are not without recourse. For example, the Supreme Court characterized a class action lawsuit under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure as the modern equivalent to the founding-era “bill of peace.” Like the bill of peace, “Rule 23 requires numerosity (such that joinder is impracticable), common questions of law or fact, typicality, and representative parties who adequately protect the interests of the class.” Id. at 13-14, citing Fed.R.Civ.P. 23(a). The Supreme Court recognized that, in certain discrete circumstances after the Rule 23 requirements are met, a district court could still certify a nationwide class action.
With this Supreme Court precedent in mind, we anticipate that class actions will become increasingly litigated in the coming years, especially pertaining to the Fed.R.Civ.P. 23 requirements for class certification. For example, in the insurance coverage context, the Supreme Court of Ohio has accepted an appeal to address questions about the Fed.R.Civ.P. 23 requirements for certifying a group of insured plaintiffs in a lawsuit against Progressive for breach of contract under the terms of their insurance policies. See Devenport, et al. v. Progressive Direct Insurance Company, et al., 2025-1102. After the parties made their jurisdictional arguments, the Supreme Court of Ohio accepted the appeal and set it for briefing on the merits.
In conclusion, universal injunctions can no longer operate as a work around to class action certification, which will likely only result in the class certification process becoming an increasingly litigated area in the coming years. It may also result in initiatives to revise the Fed.R.Civ.P. 23 class certification requirements and process to make it easier to satisfy.