The U.S. Supreme Court on October 27 declined to restore a rule allowing immigration judges to pause certain deportation proceedings, Reuters and AP reported. The decision leaves in place an agreement between Texas and the Trump administration blocking the Biden-era regulation while litigation continues.
Baltimore, New Haven and Columbus, together with Centro Legal de la Raza, sought emergency relief to defend the policy. According to the New York Times, the court issued a one-sentence order without explaining its reasoning, and no justice publicly dissented. The refusal to grant a temporary stay was not a final ruling on the underlying legal dispute.
The procedure, known as administrative closure, lets judges take cases off active dockets while other matters, such as visa applications, remain pending. Reuters reported that it has been used in hundreds of thousands of cases over decades. The Biden administration formalized the procedure in 2024, arguing that it supported efficient case management and fair treatment of immigrants.
Texas sued over that regulation on June 22, and the federal government agreed the same day to a judgment invalidating it, according to Reuters. Judge Reed O’Connor approved the agreement. The challengers alleged that the two sides cooperated to bypass public rulemaking. Texas argued that the practice effectively allowed people without legal status to remain indefinitely, an argument disputed by supporters of the rule.
In its Supreme Court filing, the Justice Department argued that the cities and legal group lacked standing and had not established irreparable harm pending appeal. The cities argued that ending the procedure would increase removals and hurt local revenues and policing; the legal group cited pressure on its resources. Those remain the parties’ claims. With emergency relief denied, the regulation stays blocked as the challenge continues.
Comments