Are editors of top-tier journals biased in their decisions by the authors names and affiliations?

Once the editors receive a manuscript for a potential publication, they obviously read the names of the authors and their affiliations. Also, it might be probable that they quickly check some historical records of the authors and some metrics, like number of citations and h-index.

Then, knowing some info about the authors who submitted a certain paper, can the decisions of the editors be influenced by the scholars names and affiliations?

Or is there any regulation, in top-tier journals, that should inhibit such a potential phenomenon?

These doubts come from the observation that some authors are able to continuously publish in top-tier journals, where most of the people struggle to get only one work in a life. Without doubt they are top scientists, but do they get always brilliant ideas? Maybe there is some literature on this topic, that I cannot find.