Ohn: As the supreme court headed into its summer break, the justices gave president trump a big win, saying the district court judges do not have the authority to issue the sort of nationwide injunctions that have blocked administration policies.

In which the court's conservative majority delivered a string of victories or president trump, many of them and emergency appear, the shadow DACA.

I spoke with two court watchers about the term and what could be coming next.

Amy is the cofounder of scotus squad and Jodi Kantor, who covered the justices in the court in depth.

Amy, how unusual is the administration's use of emergency appeals?

>> It is really unusual.

When I think back at this ter that is just ending, that is what we remember.

If it wasn't the kind of historic decisions that we had an passed terms on issues like abortion and gun rights and administrative law, but the administration came to the supreme court over and over on its emergency appeals docket.

These are the cases the supreme court is in generally deciding without a moral argument and sometimes without written decisions or even knowing how all the justices voted.

And the trump administration in the first 5.5 months or so of, since the inauguration on January 20, has already come to the supreme court on the emergency docket more than 20 times, which is more than twice as many, to put it into context, than the George W. Bush administration and the Obama administrations combined in 16 years.

John: How have they done?

What is their success rate?

>> It's high.

The biggest victory was the victory on the universal and nationwide injunctions, a case in which the supreme court did hear oral argument and issue a written decision on the merits, but they had a lot of success on other issues, including immigration and the president's efforts to remake the federal workforce and although these are theoretically temporary rulings, pausing lower court's orders while the litigation continues, they can have permanent repercussions if you're talking about firing, federal employees , about deporting people or separating transgender service memberrom the military.

John: The majority opinion on the case involving nationwide injunctions was written by justice Amy coney Barrett, who is got a lot of attention, some skepticism come from conservatives.

You took a deep dive into her jurisprudence and the criticism about her.

What did you find?

>> She is very much the justice of the season for several reasons.

She is part of the fulcrum of the court right now.

The center of the court, along with chief justice Roberts and justice Kavanaugh.

This is a court where the power is really concentrated in those three people.

Those are the three people you have to convince.

Earlier this year, there was a series of extraordinary attacks and threats against her by Maga figures.

Remember, she was appointed by president trump.

A lot of these statements were way over the line, they were personal, they were about her family, like many other federal judges, she was getting some very scary threats.

At the same time she became something as a beacon of hope for livers to notice something they were able to quantify in numbers which is that she was showing signs of leftward drift.

Then, as you say, she wrote the birthright citizenship opinion which was remarkable for a relatively junior justice.

To take on.

I mean, this is a decision that does some reordering of our legal system, and we can start to hear her voice clearly, more clearly than ever before and to see that really just five years after coming onto the court, her influence is very much -- John: Amy, one of the other areas of the court got into this year was the culture wars.

Talk about some of those cases.

>> There were couple of those cases the court in December heard a challenge to Tennessee's ban on gender affirming care, and by a vote of 6-3, the justices upheld the Tennessee law.

And this will affect similar laws in other states, this was a case in which justice Barrett joins the six justice majority and then wrote a concurring opinion in which she would have gone further and reached an issue that the majority didn't address whether or not transgender people are suspect or protected class.

Then they issued a decision in the case out of Montgomery county Maryland in the Washington DC suburbs.

They ruled that parents have a right topt their children out all instructions using lgbtq.

Storybooks John: You say thestice Barrett is at the top of the -- the center of the court along with chief justice Roberts and justice Kavanaugh, what does it say about the ideological shift of this court that these three would be in the middle?

They are not moderate.

>> They are definitely not moderates by any definition of the word.

It just says that the center of the court has shifted to the right.

John: Jodi also talked about the threats that have been on again some of these justices.

The day after the court's term ended chief justice Roberts spoke at a conference in north Carolina and address the rising criticism.

>> The changer is somebody might pick -- the danger is that someone might pick up on the and we have serious threats of violence and murder.

All judges.

Simply for doing their work.

Threatening the judges for doing their job is totally unacceptable and people should be careful about doing that.

John: In your story about justice Barrett, you found threats not only against her but against her family.

>> Exactly.

We actually obtained the police report about a bomb threat to her sister in South Carolina.

The language is really menacing.

It is really specific, an empty threat.

There was no bomb.

It is a truly scary sign of the times that it's not just the jurists who are being threatened, it is their extended families.

John: You also say that her youngest son asked why mommy has a bulult-proof vest.

>> She counted up this really memorable moment in a recent speech.

She talks about being at home and her son spies the bulletproof vest in the house and asks her, what is this, why do you have this?

John: How would the justices coping with this?

> It is hard to say exactly.

The court does not comment on the justices security.

I've been going to the supreme court for a long time, there is a visibly more security at the supreme court when the court is in session.

And then surrounding the justices when they are out and about in the public but I imagine it has to really weigh on him.

John: Thank you both very much.

>> Thank you.

>> Thank you.