By Newspot Nigeria Editorial Board
These days in America, a legal storm is swirling over something called the “universal injunction.” At its heart, it’s a type of court order that stops the government from enforcing a law—not just for the person who filed a lawsuit, but for everyone, at least temporarily. Think of it as a judicial pause button when a law might be unconstitutional.
Critics call it overreach. They say judges weren’t meant to wield that much power. But a groundbreaking article by legal scholar Mila Sohoni, titled The Lost History of the “Universal” Injunction, tells a different story—one that’s not only relevant to the United States, but offers critical insights for Nigeria’s legal system as well.
A Long, Forgotten History
Sohoni reveals that universal injunctions are not some modern “activist judge” gimmick. In fact, courts in the U.S. have been issuing them for over 100 years. In 1913, for example, the Supreme Court of the United States blocked enforcement of a federal law not just for the party in court, but also for other publishers (Journal of Commerce v. Burleson). That’s a classic universal injunction.
In Pierce v. Society of Sisters (1925), the Supreme Court stopped the state of Oregon from forcing all children to attend public schools—protecting private schools, religious communities, and families across the entire state, not just the two plaintiffs.
Then there’s Reagan v. Farmers’ Loan & Trust Co. (1894), where Texas officials were barred from enforcing low railroad rates. The court didn’t stop there—it went as far as banning all private citizens from filing lawsuits under that law against the railway. That’s sweeping. That’s universal.
Even West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette (1943) used the same principle. There, the court ruled that children with religious objections could not be forced to salute the American flag in public schools. The ruling didn’t just apply to the named plaintiffs—it extended to “any other children having religious scruples.”
In these cases—and many others—courts recognized that some laws are so harmful, and some rights so foundational, that protections shouldn’t be limited to the first person who files a case. When the law is wrong, courts have the duty to stop its effects for all, not just a few.
So, Why Does This Matter to Nigeria?
Nigeria faces many of the same challenges: fast-moving executive actions, sudden regulations, disputed laws, and a population often left out of courtroom battles due to poverty, fear, or lack of access. In such a system, if a court determines that a new government directive violates constitutional rights, why should relief be limited to only the person who had the means to sue?
Let’s say a controversial policy affects fuel prices, education, or even voting rights. If one citizen challenges it in court and wins, shouldn’t the judgment protect everyone affected—not just the lucky or bold few? Otherwise, our courts become clubs for the privileged, not defenders of the Constitution.
And it’s not just about fairness. Universal injunctions help prevent confusion—like when a law is paused in one part of the country but still enforced in another. For a country like Nigeria, with 36 states and 774 local governments, this clarity could be essential.
A Word of Caution—and Hope
Sohoni warns that some U.S. lawmakers and judges now want to strip courts of this power. But doing so would limit judges to protecting individuals, not the broader public interest. That’s not justice. That’s a retreat.
Fortunately, Nigeria can learn from this unfolding American debate. Our judiciary doesn’t need to follow America’s mistakes—it can draw from its earlier wisdom.
The real lesson? Courts are more than referees between private disputes. They are guardians of the Constitution. And sometimes, that means stopping the government in its tracks—not just for one person, but for all.
At Newspot Nigeria, we believe that in today’s legal and political environment—where power is often concentrated and accountability weak—the ability of courts to issue broad protections isn’t just helpful; it’s essential.
We urge Nigerian legal minds, lawmakers, and judges to recognize this forgotten truth: when justice is under threat, it must be shielded universally—not selectively.
Published by Newspot Nigeria.
