Supreme Court Halts Trump’s Emergency Appeal Win Streak
The Trump administration’s strong run on the Supreme Court’s emergency docket hit a temporary pause Friday after the justices declined to immediately intervene in a dispute involving speech rules for immigration judges.
For the first time since spring, the Court rejected an emergency appeal from the administration, choosing—for now—to allow the case to continue in the lower courts. The order leaves the door open for the government to return if circumstances change, and notably, no justice publicly dissented from the decision, according to The Hill.
“At this stage, the Government has not demonstrated that it will suffer irreparable harm without a stay,” the Court stated in its brief, one-paragraph order.
At the center of the case is a Trump administration policy governing what immigration judges may say publicly. Under the policy, judges—who are executive branch employees—must obtain approval before speaking on topics closely related to their official duties.
The National Association of Immigration Judges (NAIJ) argues the restrictions violate the First Amendment. However, the Supreme Court has not yet addressed the constitutional merits of that claim.
Instead, the administration asked the justices to block a lower-court ruling that allows the lawsuit to proceed in federal district court. The government maintains that the dispute must be handled by the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB), the specialized body Congress created to resolve certain federal employment disputes.
That procedural question carries broad implications beyond this case. Solicitor General D. John Sauer warned the Court that allowing the lawsuit to move forward outside the MSPB framework would undermine the board’s authority.
“The answer to such prolific contravention of the Court’s precedents should not be to wait and see just how much instability will ensue,” Sauer wrote in court filings, adding that the lower court’s decision would “indefinitely thwart the MSPB.”
The appeals court acknowledged the MSPB’s role but pointed to actions taken by President Donald J. Trump—specifically the dismissal of board members that temporarily left the MSPB without a quorum—as justification for letting the case proceed. The court said those circumstances raised “serious questions” about whether the board “continues to function as intended.”
Progressive legal groups quickly celebrated the ruling.
“The Supreme Court was right to reject the government’s request for a stay of proceedings,” said Ramya Krishnan, a senior staff attorney at the Knight First Amendment Institute, which represents the immigration judges’ association.
“It should also quickly reject the government’s soon-to-be filed cert petition,” she added, referring to the administration’s expected request for full Supreme Court review. “The restrictions on immigration judges’ free speech rights are unconstitutional and it’s intolerable that this prior restraint is still in place.”
While critics seized on Friday’s order as a setback, it remains a rare outcome. Since President Trump returned to office, his administration has filed 32 emergency applications with the Supreme Court. Opponents argue the volume reflects unlawful executive action, while the administration counters that activist federal judges have repeatedly overstepped their authority to block Trump’s lawful agenda.
In the overwhelming majority of emergency cases decided so far, the Supreme Court has sided with the Trump administration. Several applications remain pending, and others were withdrawn before a ruling.
Earlier this week, the Court again declined to temporarily halt a related challenge involving the same speech restrictions. In a brief, unsigned ruling, the justices allowed a decision from the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to stand, reviving the NAIJ lawsuit. However, the Court emphasized that the government may return if the trial court moves forward with discovery before the justices decide whether to take the case.
The dispute continues to highlight growing tensions between executive authority, administrative law, and the judiciary—an ongoing theme of President Trump’s second term.