Case: O. Doe v. Trump

Doe v. Trump

Lucas Guttentag

President Donald Trump

COMPLAINT Against ALL DEFENDANTS against Filing fee: $ 405, receipt number AMADC-10795962 (Fee Status: Filing Fee paid), filed by O. Doe, Brazilian Worker Center, La Colaborativa. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit (Executive Order), # 2 Civil Cover Sheet, # 3 Category Form)(Espinoza-Madrigal, Ivan) M (Entered: 01/21/2025)

1 Exhibit (Executive Order)

View on RECAP

2 Civil Cover Sheet

View on RECAP

3 Category Form

View on RECAP

MOTION to Proceed Pseudonymously by O. Doe, Brazilian Worker Center, La Colaborativa.(Albert, Mirian) (Entered: 01/21/2025)

Notice of Case Assignment

NOTICE of Appearance by Mirian Albert on behalf of O. Doe, Brazilian Worker Center, La Colaborativa (Albert, Mirian) (Entered: 01/21/2025)

ELECTRONIC NOTICE of Case Assignment. District Judge Leo T. Sorokin assigned to case. If the trial Judge issues an Order of Reference of any matter in this case to a Magistrate Judge, the matter will be transmitted to Magistrate Judge M. Page Kelley. (NMC) (Entered: 01/21/2025)

NOTICE of Appearance by Jacob M. Love on behalf of O. Doe, Brazilian Worker Center, La Colaborativa (Love, Jacob) (Entered: 01/21/2025)

NOTICE of Appearance by Oren M. Sellstrom on behalf of O. Doe, Brazilian Worker Center, La Colaborativa (Sellstrom, Oren) (Entered: 01/21/2025)

Summons Issued as to Michelle King, Marco Rubio, Donald J. Trump, President of the United States, US Department of State, US Social Security Administration. Counsel receiving this notice electronically should download this summons, complete one for each defendant and serve it in accordance with Fed.R.Civ.P. 4 and LR 4.1. Summons will be mailed to plaintiff(s) not receiving notice electronically for completion of service. (LBO) (Entered: 01/21/2025)

NOTICE of Appearance by Oren M. Sellstrom on behalf of O. Doe, Brazilian Worker Center, La Colaborativa (Sellstrom, Oren) (Entered: 01/22/2025)

District Judge Leo T. Sorokin: ELECTRONIC ORDER entered: re 2 MOTION to Proceed Pseudonymously. The motion of the individual plaintiff to proceed pseudonymously (Doc. No. 2) is ALLOWED. This ruling is subject to de novo review if the defendants oppose the request within seven days of their appearance. (SED) (Entered: 01/23/2025)

Order on Motion for Miscellaneous Relief

MOTION for Preliminary Injunction by O. Doe, Brazilian Worker Center, La Colaborativa.(Love, Jacob) (Entered: 01/23/2025)

MEMORANDUM in Support re 10 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction filed by O. Doe, Brazilian Worker Center, La Colaborativa. (Attachments: # 1 Doe Declaration, # 2 Vega Declaration, # 3 Reason Declaration, # 4 Rodriguez Declaration, # 5 Danaher Declaration, # 6 Molina Declaration, # 7 Galletly Declaration, # 8 Kanstroom Declaration, # 9 Culliton-Gonzalez Declaration, # 10 Merjian Declaration)(Love, Jacob) (Entered: 01/24/2025)

1 Doe Declaration

View on RECAP

2 Vega Declaration

View on RECAP

3 Reason Declaration

View on RECAP

4 Rodriguez Declaration

View on RECAP

5 Danaher Declaration

View on RECAP

6 Molina Declaration

View on RECAP

7 Galletly Declaration

View on RECAP

8 Kanstroom Declaration

View on RECAP

9 Culliton-Gonzalez Declaration

View on RECAP

10 Merjian Declaration

View on RECAP

District Judge Leo T. Sorokin: ELECTRONIC ORDER entered. The defendants' opposition to the plaintiffs' motion for preliminary injunction (Doc. No. 10 ) is due on January 31, 2025. The plaintiffs may file a reply brief, limited to five pages in length, by February 4, 2025. The Court will hold an in-person hearing on the motion at 10 AM on Friday, February 7, 2025. Counsel for the plaintiffs shall provide a copy of this Order, along with copies of the motion papers, to the following by 5 PM today: Brad P. Rosenberg, Special Counsel, Federal Programs Branch, Civil Division, U.S. Department of Justice; Leah Foley, U.S. Attorney for the District of Massachusetts; and the Chief of the Civil Division of the U.S. Attorneys Office for the District of Massachusetts. Electronic service suffices. Motion Hearing set for 2/7/2025 10:00 AM in Courtroom 13 (In person only) before District Judge Leo T. Sorokin.)(SED) (Entered: 01/24/2025)

Order AND ~Util - Set Motion and R&R Deadlines/Hearings

NOTICE of Appearance by Brad P. Rosenberg on behalf of Donald J. Trump, US Department of State, Marco Rubio, US Social Security Administration, Michelle King (Rosenberg, Brad) (Entered: 01/24/2025)

CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE by O. Doe, Brazilian Worker Center, La Colaborativa re 12 Order (Albert, Mirian) (Main Document 14 replaced on 1/24/2025 with corrected PDF) (FGD). (Entered: 01/24/2025)

NOTICE of Appearance by Robert Charles Merritt on behalf of Donald J. Trump, US Department of State, Marco Rubio, US Social Security Administration, Michelle King (Merritt, Robert) (Entered: 01/24/2025)

NOTICE of Appearance by Yuri Fuchs on behalf of Donald J. Trump, US Department of State, Marco Rubio, US Social Security Administration, Michelle King (Fuchs, Yuri) (Entered: 01/27/2025)

Assented to MOTION for Leave to File Excess Pages by O. Doe, Brazilian Worker Center, La Colaborativa.(Sellstrom, Oren) (Entered: 01/28/2025)

District Judge Leo T. Sorokin: ORDER entered. New Civil Cases General Procedural ORDER. (FGD) (Entered: 01/28/2025)

District Judge Leo T. Sorokin: ELECTRONIC ORDER entered re: 17 Assented to MOTION for Leave to File Excess Pages.ALLOWED. Defendants' consolidated opposition brief, due January 31, 2025, is limited to 40 pages in length. The plaintiffs in this case may file a 10-page reply brief by February 4, 2025; the plaintiffs in the related case may file a separate 10-page reply brief by the same date. Counsel using the Electronic Case Filing System should now file the document for which leave to file has been granted in accordance with the CM/ECF Administrative Procedures. Counsel must include - Leave to file granted on (date of order)- in the caption of the document. (FGD) (Entered: 01/29/2025)

Order on Motion for Leave to File Excess Pages

Copy Mailed

Copy re 19 Order on Motion for Leave to File Excess Pages, emailed to All Attorneys on related case 25-cv-10139-LTS on 1/29/2025. (FGD) (Entered: 01/29/2025)

RESPONSE to Motion re 2 MOTION to Proceed Pseudonymously filed by Donald J. Trump, US Department of State, Marco Rubio, US Social Security Administration, Michelle King. (Fuchs, Yuri) (Entered: 01/31/2025)

Opposition re 10 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction filed by Donald J. Trump, US Department of State, Marco Rubio, US Social Security Administration, Michelle King. (Merritt, Robert) (Entered: 01/31/2025)

NOTICE of Appearance by Matthew James O'Brien on behalf of Immigration Reform Law Institute (O'Brien, Matthew) (Entered: 02/03/2025)

MOTION for Leave to File Amicus Brief by State of Tennessee. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Proposed Amicus Brief of the State of Tennessee)(Coulam, Andrew) (Entered: 02/03/2025)

1 Exhibit Proposed Amicus Brief of the State of Tennessee

View on RECAP

MOTION for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice for admission of James Matthew Rice and Whitney D. Hermandorfer Filing fee: $ 250, receipt number AMADC-10821099 by State of Tennessee. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Certificate of JMR, # 2 Exhibit Certificate of WDH)(Coulam, Andrew) (Entered: 02/03/2025)

1 Exhibit Certificate of JMR

View on RECAP

2 Exhibit Certificate of WDH

View on RECAP

Consent MOTION for Leave to File Amicus Brief by Immigration Reform Law Institute. (Attachments: # 1 IRLI Amicus Brief)(O'Brien, Matthew) (Entered: 02/03/2025)

1 IRLI Amicus Brief

View on RECAP

NOTICE of Appearance by Andrew C. Coulam on behalf of State of Tennessee (Coulam, Andrew) (Entered: 02/03/2025)

District Judge Leo T. Sorokin: ELECTRONIC ORDER entered granting 25 Motion for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice Added James Matthew Rice, and Whitney D. Hermandorfer. Attorneys admitted Pro Hac Vice must have an individual PACER account, not a shared firm account, to electronically file in the District of Massachusetts. To register for a PACER account, go the Pacer website at https://pacer.uscourts.gov/register-account. You must put the docket number under ADDITIONAL FILER INFORMATION on your form when registering or it will be rejected.Pro Hac Vice Admission Request Instructions https://www.mad.uscourts.gov/caseinfo/nextgen-pro-hac-vice.htm.A Notice of Appearance must be entered on the docket by the newly admitted attorney. (FGD) (Entered: 02/04/2025)

Order on Motion for Leave to Appear

Order on Motion for Leave to File Document AND Order on Motion for Leave to File Document

Addendum to Motion/Memorandum

NOTICE of Appearance by Whitney D. Hermandorfer on behalf of State of Tennessee (Hermandorfer, Whitney) (Entered: 02/04/2025)

District Judge Leo T. Sorokin: ELECTRONIC ORDER entered: The Motions for Leave to submit amicus briefs filed by Tennessee (# 24 ) and Immigration Reform Law Institute (# 26 ) are ALLOWED. Counsel using the Electronic Case Filing System should now file the document for which leave to file has been granted in accordance with the CM/ECF Administrative Procedures. Counsel must include - Leave to file granted on (date of order)- in the caption of the document. (FGD) (Entered: 02/04/2025)

NOTICE of Appearance by James Matthew Rice on behalf of State of Tennessee (Rice, James) (Entered: 02/04/2025)

AMICUS BRIEF filed by Immigration Reform Law Institute . (O'Brien, Matthew) (Entered: 02/04/2025)

REPLY to Response to 10 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction filed by O. Doe, Brazilian Worker Center, La Colaborativa. (Albert, Mirian) (Entered: 02/04/2025)

MOTION for Leave to File Amicus Brief in Opposition to Plaintiff's 10 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction filed by Edwin L Meese, III. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Amicus Brief)(McNamara, Frank) Modified docket text and docketing event on 2/5/2025, to properly reflect document filed. (FGD) (Entered: 02/04/2025)

1 Exhibit Amicus Brief

View on RECAP

Duplicate entry filed in error. Please see entry 34 . (Entered: 02/04/2025)

1 Exhibit Amicus Brief

View on RECAP

Amicus Curiae APPEARANCE entered by Frank L. McNamara, Jr on behalf of Edwin L Meese, III. (McNamara, Frank) (Entered: 02/04/2025)

District Judge Leo T. Sorokin: ELECTRONIC ORDER entered re: 34 MOTION for Leave to File Amicus Brief in Opposition to Plaintiff's 10 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction.ALLOWED. Counsel using the Electronic Case Filing System should now file the document for which leave to file has been granted in accordance with the CM/ECF Administrative Procedures. Counsel must include - Leave to file granted on (date of order)- in the caption of the document. (FGD) (Entered: 02/05/2025)

Order on Motion for Leave to File Document

AMICUS BRIEF filed by State of Tennessee . (Coulam, Andrew) (Entered: 02/05/2025)

NOTICE of Appearance by Ryan P. McLane on behalf of Edwin L Meese, III (McLane, Ryan) (Entered: 02/05/2025)

AMICUS BRIEF filed by Edwin L Meese, III . (McLane, Ryan) (Main Document 40 replaced on 2/6/2025, with corrected PDF). (FGD) (Entered: 02/05/2025)

NOTICE of Appearance by Eric Hamilton on behalf of Donald J. Trump, US Department of State, Marco Rubio, US Social Security Administration, Michelle King (Hamilton, Eric) (Entered: 02/06/2025)

SUMMONS Returned Executed as to US Attorney by La Colaborativa, Brazilian Worker Center, O. Doe. All Defendants. (Attachments: # 1 Affidavit of Service on the United States and All Defendants)(Love, Jacob) (Entered: 02/06/2025)

1 Affidavit of Service on the United States and All Defendants

View on RECAP

Electronic Clerk's Notes for proceedings held before District Judge Leo T. Sorokin: Motion Hearing held on 2/7/2025 re ( 10 in 1:25-cv-10135-LTS) MOTION for Preliminary Injunction and ( 3 in 1:25-cv-10139-LTS) MOTION for Preliminary Injunction. The court hears arguments on both motions for preliminary injunction. The motions are taken under advisement. (Court Reporter: Rachel Lopez at raeufp@gmail.com.)(Attorneys present: Mirian Albert, Oren M. Sellstrom, and Jacob M. Love for plaintiffs in case 25cv10135-LTS, Shankar Duraiswamy, Gerard J. Cedrone, Jared B. Cohen, and Irina Trasovan for plaintiffs in case 25cv10139-LTS, Brad P. Rosenberg, and Eric Hamilton for the defendants.) Associated Cases: 1:25-cv-10135-LTS, 1:25-cv-10139-LTS(SED) (Entered: 02/07/2025)

Motion Hearing

Transcript of Motion Hearing held on February 7, 2025, before Judge Leo T. Sorokin. The Transcript may be purchased through the Court Reporter, viewed at the public terminal, or viewed through PACER after it is released. Court Reporter Name and Contact Information: Rachel Lopez at raeufp@gmail.com. Redaction Request due 3/6/2025. Redacted Transcript Deadline set for 3/17/2025. Release of Transcript Restriction set for 5/14/2025. Associated Cases: 1:25-cv-10135-LTS, 1:25-cv-10139-LTS(DRK) (Entered: 02/13/2025)

Notice of Filing of Official Transcript

NOTICE is hereby given that an official transcript of a proceeding has been filed by the court reporter in the above-captioned matter. Counsel are referred to the Court's Transcript Redaction Policy, available on the court website at https://www.mad.uscourts.gov/caseinfo/transcripts.htm Associated Cases: 1:25-cv-10135-LTS, 1:25-cv-10139-LTS(DRK) (Entered: 02/13/2025)

District Judge Leo T. Sorokin: ORDER entered. MEMORANDUM OF DECISION ON MOTIONS FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION. Associated Cases: 1:25-cv-10139-LTS, 1:25-cv-10135-LTS(FGD) (Entered: 02/13/2025)

District Judge Leo T. Sorokin: ORDER entered. PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION. (FGD) (Entered: 02/13/2025)

NOTICE OF INTERLOCUTORY APPEAL as to 46 Memorandum & ORDER, Terminate Motions, 47 Preliminary Injunction by Donald J. Trump, US Department of State, Marco Rubio, US Social Security Administration, Michelle King. ( (Fee Status: US Government)) NOTICE TO COUNSEL: A Transcript Report/Order Form, which can be downloaded from the First Circuit Court of Appeals web site at http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov MUST be completed and submitted to the Court of Appeals. Counsel shall register for a First Circuit CM/ECF Appellate Filer Account at http://pacer.psc.uscourts.gov/cmecf. Counsel shall also review the First Circuit requirements for electronic filing by visiting the CM/ECF Information section at http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/efiling.htm. US District Court Clerk to deliver official record to Court of Appeals by 3/11/2025. (Fuchs, Yuri) (Entered: 02/19/2025)

USCA Case Number

Certified and Transmitted Abbreviated Electronic Record on Appeal to US Court of Appeals re 48 Notice of Interlocutory Appeal. (MAP) (Entered: 02/19/2025)

USCA Case Number 25-1169 for 48 Notice of Interlocutory Appeal, filed by US Social Security Administration, US Department of State, Michelle King, Marco Rubio, Donald J. Trump. (MAP) (Entered: 02/19/2025)

NOTICE of Appearance by Michael P. Sady on behalf of Donald J. Trump, US Department of State, Marco Rubio, US Social Security Administration, Michelle King (Sady, Michael) (Entered: 02/19/2025)

NOTICE of Withdrawal of Appearance by Michael P. Sady (Sady, Michael) (Entered: 02/20/2025)

Assented to MOTION for Extension of Time to May 12, 2025 to File Answer re [1] Complaint, by Donald J. Trump, US Department of State, Marco Rubio, US Social Security Administration, Michelle King. (Attachments: (1) Exhibit Proposed Order)(Fuchs, Yuri)

1 Exhibit Proposed Order

View on RECAP

District Judge Leo T. Sorokin: ELECTRONIC ORDER entered re: 53 Assented to Motion for Extension of Time to Answer re 1 Complaint.ALLOWED. Michelle King answer due 5/12/2025; Marco Rubio answer due 5/12/2025; Donald J. Trump answer due 5/12/2025; US Department of State answer due 5/12/2025; US Social Security Administration answer due 5/12/2025. (FGD) (Entered: 03/20/2025)

Order on Motion for Extension of Time to Answer

MOTION to Withdraw as Attorney by Immigration Reform Law Institute.(O'Brien, Matthew) (Entered: 04/24/2025)

District Judge Leo T. Sorokin: ELECTRONIC ORDER entered: re 55 MOTION to Withdraw as Attorney. ALLOWED. (CEH) (Entered: 04/25/2025)

Order on Motion to Withdraw as Attorney

Assented to MOTION for Extension of Time to June 11, 2025 to File Answer re 1 Complaint, by Michelle King, Marco Rubio, Donald J. Trump, US Department of State, US Social Security Administration. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Fuchs, Yuri) (Entered: 05/01/2025)

District Judge Leo T. Sorokin: ELECTRONIC ORDER entered: re 57 Assented to MOTION for Extension of Time to June 11, 2025 to File Answer re 1 Complaint.ALLOWED. (SED) (Entered: 05/02/2025)

Order on Motion for Extension of Time to Answer

Assented to MOTION for Extension of Time to July 11, 2025 to File Answer re 1 Complaint, by Michelle King, Marco Rubio, Donald J. Trump, US Department of State, US Social Security Administration. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Fuchs, Yuri) (Entered: 06/03/2025)

1 Text of Proposed Order

View on PACER

Order on Motion for Extension of Time to Answer

District Judge Leo T. Sorokin: ELECTRONIC ORDER entered re: 59 Assented to MOTION for Extension of Time to July 11, 2025 to File Answer re 1 Complain.ALLOWED. Michelle King answer due 7/11/2025; Marco Rubio answer due 7/11/2025; Donald J. Trump answer due 7/11/2025; US Department of State answer due 7/11/2025; US Social Security Administration answer due 7/11/2025. (FGD) (Entered: 06/03/2025)

NOTICE of Withdrawal of Appearance by Jacob M. Love (Love, Jacob) (Entered: 06/11/2025)

ORDER of USCA as to 48 Notice of Interlocutory Appeal, filed by US Social Security Administration, US Department of State, Michelle King, Marco Rubio, Donald J. Trump.The defendants-appellants have filed a Motion for Supplemental Briefing Order (the "Motion") to this court in connection with New Jersey v. Trump, No. 25-1170. That case involves the defendants-appellants' appeal of a February 13, 2025 order by the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts. The District Court's order granted a "universal" preliminary injunction enjoining the enforcement of Executive Order No. 14,160, titled "Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship." Exec. Order No. 14,160, 90 Fed. Reg. 8449 (Jan. 20, 2025). That appeal is pending in this court, and oral argument is scheduled in this court on August 1, 2025. The Motion asks us to order supplemental briefing on the effect of the United States Supreme Court's order in Trump v. CASA, Inc., 606 U.S. __ (2025), on this appeal to "allow this Court to 'move expeditiously to ensure that... the injunctio[n] comport[s] with' the Supreme Court's decision." They propose a schedule in which the supplemental briefs "would be due on July 11" so that "[t]he Court would then be positioned to rule on whether the nationwide injunction is broader than necessary to provide complete relief to the plaintiffs, an issue this Court declined to consider in initially ruling on the government's stay motion." They further assert that "adopting this course would comport with the Supreme Court's instruction that the lower courts should 'move expeditiously' to resolve outstanding issues about the scope of the injunction." The plaintiffs-appellees oppose the Motion. In urging us to grant the Motion, the defendants-appellants state that "[i]f the district courts existing decision is insufficient to establish" that the universal injunction entered in this case comports with the complete-relief principle and other principles of equity, "then the universal scope of that injunction is appropriately stayed." There is no motion, however, pending before this court for a stay pending appeal of the preliminary injunction on appeal in No. 25-1170, which injunction the defendants-appellants appear to agree is not stayed at present. To be sure, on February 27, 2025, the defendants-appellants did file a motion in our court to stay the injunction, as they note in the Motion. But we denied the stay and, in the opinion doing so, we declined to address the "narrower relief" proposed by the defendants-appellants in their stay motion to this court because they had failed to raise it in opposing the grant of a nationwide preliminary injunction in the preliminary injunction proceedings themselves or in requesting a stay of that injunction from the District Court. Moreover, CASA provides fresh guidance regarding the equitable powers of federal courts. See CASA, 606 U.S. at __, slip op. at 17-18. Thus, in aid of our consideration of the issues on appeal, and consistent with the Supreme Court's instruction that "[t]he lower courts should determine whether a narrower injunction is appropriate" and "move expeditiously" to ensure that the injunction comports with the "principles of equity" described in CASA, id. slip op. at 19, 26 (emphasis added), we conclude that it is prudent to remand to the District Court, while retaining our jurisdiction over the appeal. The remand is for the limited purpose of enabling the District Court to consider the bearing, if any, of that guidance in CASA on the scope of the preliminary injunction in No. 25-1170 and to act accordingly. In doing so, we expect the District Court to address any arguments that the parties may advance with respect to what grounds may now be asserted regarding the injunction's scope. For these reasons, the Motion is denied, and the matter is remanded to the District Court for the limited purposes described herein, with this court retaining jurisdiction. We understand the District Court will act promptly in accordance with the briefing schedule that it entered on July 2, 2025. (MAP) (Entered: 07/06/2025)

ORDER of USCA as to 48 Notice of Interlocutory Appeal, filed by US Social Security Administration, US Department of State, Michelle King, Marco Rubio, Donald J. Trump.The defendants-appellants have filed a Motion for Supplemental Briefing Order (the "Motion") to this court in connection with New Jersey v. Trump, No. 25-1170. That case involves the defendants-appellants' appeal of a February 13, 2025 order by the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts. The District Court's order granted a "universal" preliminary injunction enjoining the enforcement of Executive Order No. 14,160, titled "Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship." Exec. Order No. 14,160, 90 Fed. Reg. 8449 (Jan. 20, 2025). That appeal is pending in this court, and oral argument is scheduled in this court on August 1, 2025. The Motion asks us to order supplemental briefing on the effect of the United States Supreme Court's order in Trump v. CASA, Inc., 606 U.S. __ (2025), on this appeal to "allow this Court to 'move expeditiously to ensure that... the injunctio[n] comport[s] with' the Supreme Court's decision." They propose a schedule in which the supplemental briefs "would be due on July 11" so that "[t]he Court would then be positioned to rule on whether the nationwide injunction is broader than necessary to provide complete relief to the plaintiffs, an issue this Court declined to consider in initially ruling on the government's stay motion." They further assert that "adopting this course would comport with the Supreme Court's instruction that the lower courts should 'move expeditiously' to resolve outstanding issues about the scope of the injunction." The plaintiffs-appellees oppose the Motion. In urging us to grant the Motion, the defendants-appellants state that "[i]f the district courts existing decision is insufficient to establish" that the universal injunction entered in this case comports with the complete-relief principle and other principles of equity, "then the universal scope of that injunction is appropriately stayed." There is no motion, however, pending before this court for a stay pending appeal of the preliminary injunction on appeal in No. 25-1170, which injunction the defendants-appellants appear to agree is not stayed at present. To be sure, on February 27, 2025, the defendants-appellants did file a motion in our court to stay the injunction, as they note in the Motion. But we denied the stay and, in the opinion doing so, we declined to address the "narrower relief" proposed by the defendants-appellants in their stay motion to this court because they had failed to raise it in opposing the grant of a nationwide preliminary injunction in the preliminary injunction proceedings themselves or in requesting a stay of that injunction from the District Court. Moreover, CASA provides fresh guidance regarding the equitable powers of federal courts. See CASA, 606 U.S. at __, slip op. at 17-18. Thus, in aid of our consideration of the issues on appeal, and consistent with the Supreme Court's instruction that "[t]he lower courts should determine whether a narrower injunction is appropriate" and "move expeditiously" to ensure that the injunction comports with the "principles of equity" described in CASA, id. slip op. at 19, 26 (emphasis added), we conclude that it is prudent to remand to the District Court, while retaining our jurisdiction over the appeal. The remand is for the limited purpose of enabling the District Court to consider the bearing, if any, of that guidance in CASA on the scope of the preliminary injunction in No. 25-1170 and to act accordingly. In doing so, we expect the District Court to address any arguments that the parties may advance with respect to what grounds may now be asserted regarding the injunction's scope. For these reasons, the Motion is denied, and the matter is remanded to the District Court for the limited purposes described herein, with this court retaining jurisdiction. We understand the District Court will act promptly in accordance with the briefing schedule that it entered on July 2, 2025. (MAP) (Entered: 07/06/2025)

ORDER of USCA as to 48 Notice of Interlocutory Appeal, filed by US Social Security Administration, US Department of State, Michelle King, Marco Rubio, Donald J. Trump.The defendants-appellants have filed a Motion for Supplemental Briefing Order (the "Motion") to this court in connection with New Jersey v. Trump, No. 25-1170. That case involves the defendants-appellants' appeal of a February 13, 2025 order by the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts. The District Court's order granted a "universal" preliminary injunction enjoining the enforcement of Executive Order No. 14,160, titled "Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship." Exec. Order No. 14,160, 90 Fed. Reg. 8449 (Jan. 20, 2025). That appeal is pending in this court, and oral argument is scheduled in this court on August 1, 2025. The Motion asks us to order supplemental briefing on the effect of the United States Supreme Court's order in Trump v. CASA, Inc., 606 U.S. __ (2025), on this appeal to "allow this Court to 'move expeditiously to ensure that... the injunctio[n] comport[s] with' the Supreme Court's decision." They propose a schedule in which the supplemental briefs "would be due on July 11" so that "[t]he Court would then be positioned to rule on whether the nationwide injunction is broader than necessary to provide complete relief to the plaintiffs, an issue this Court declined to consider in initially ruling on the government's stay motion." They further assert that "adopting this course would comport with the Supreme Court's instruction that the lower courts should 'move expeditiously' to resolve outstanding issues about the scope of the injunction." The plaintiffs-appellees oppose the Motion. In urging us to grant the Motion, the defendants-appellants state that "[i]f the district courts existing decision is insufficient to establish" that the universal injunction entered in this case comports with the complete-relief principle and other principles of equity, "then the universal scope of that injunction is appropriately stayed." There is no motion, however, pending before this court for a stay pending appeal of the preliminary injunction on appeal in No. 25-1170, which injunction the defendants-appellants appear to agree is not stayed at present. To be sure, on February 27, 2025, the defendants-appellants did file a motion in our court to stay the injunction, as they note in the Motion. But we denied the stay and, in the opinion doing so, we declined to address the "narrower relief" proposed by the defendants-appellants in their stay motion to this court because they had failed to raise it in opposing the grant of a nationwide preliminary injunction in the preliminary injunction proceedings themselves or in requesting a stay of that injunction from the District Court. Moreover, CASA provides fresh guidance regarding the equitable powers of federal courts. See CASA, 606 U.S. at __, slip op. at 17-18. Thus, in aid of our consideration of the issues on appeal, and consistent with the Supreme Court's instruction that "[t]he lower courts should determine whether a narrower injunction is appropriate" and "move expeditiously" to ensure that the injunction comports with the "principles of equity" described in CASA, id. slip op. at 19, 26 (emphasis added), we conclude that it is prudent to remand to the District Court, while retaining our jurisdiction over the appeal. The remand is for the limited purpose of enabling the District Court to consider the bearing, if any, of that guidance in CASA on the scope of the preliminary injunction in No. 25-1170 and to act accordingly. In doing so, we expect the District Court to address any arguments that the parties may advance with respect to what grounds may now be asserted regarding the injunction's scope. For these reasons, the Motion is denied, and the matter is remanded to the District Court for the limited purposes described herein, with this court retaining jurisdiction. We understand the District Court will act promptly in accordance with the briefing schedule that it entered on July 2, 2025. (MAP) (Entered: 07/06/2025)

ORDER of USCA as to 48 Notice of Interlocutory Appeal, filed by US Social Security Administration, US Department of State, Michelle King, Marco Rubio, Donald J. Trump.The defendants-appellants have filed a Motion for Supplemental Briefing Order (the "Motion") to this court in connection with New Jersey v. Trump, No. 25-1170. That case involves the defendants-appellants' appeal of a February 13, 2025 order by the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts. The District Court's order granted a "universal" preliminary injunction enjoining the enforcement of Executive Order No. 14,160, titled "Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship." Exec. Order No. 14,160, 90 Fed. Reg. 8449 (Jan. 20, 2025). That appeal is pending in this court, and oral argument is scheduled in this court on August 1, 2025. The Motion asks us to order supplemental briefing on the effect of the United States Supreme Court's order in Trump v. CASA, Inc., 606 U.S. __ (2025), on this appeal to "allow this Court to 'move expeditiously to ensure that... the injunctio[n] comport[s] with' the Supreme Court's decision." They propose a schedule in which the supplemental briefs "would be due on July 11" so that "[t]he Court would then be positioned to rule on whether the nationwide injunction is broader than necessary to provide complete relief to the plaintiffs, an issue this Court declined to consider in initially ruling on the government's stay motion." They further assert that "adopting this course would comport with the Supreme Court's instruction that the lower courts should 'move expeditiously' to resolve outstanding issues about the scope of the injunction." The plaintiffs-appellees oppose the Motion. In urging us to grant the Motion, the defendants-appellants state that "[i]f the district courts existing decision is insufficient to establish" that the universal injunction entered in this case comports with the complete-relief principle and other principles of equity, "then the universal scope of that injunction is appropriately stayed." There is no motion, however, pending before this court for a stay pending appeal of the preliminary injunction on appeal in No. 25-1170, which injunction the defendants-appellants appear to agree is not stayed at present. To be sure, on February 27, 2025, the defendants-appellants did file a motion in our court to stay the injunction, as they note in the Motion. But we denied the stay and, in the opinion doing so, we declined to address the "narrower relief" proposed by the defendants-appellants in their stay motion to this court because they had failed to raise it in opposing the grant of a nationwide preliminary injunction in the preliminary injunction proceedings themselves or in requesting a stay of that injunction from the District Court. Moreover, CASA provides fresh guidance regarding the equitable powers of federal courts. See CASA, 606 U.S. at __, slip op. at 17-18. Thus, in aid of our consideration of the issues on appeal, and consistent with the Supreme Court's instruction that "[t]he lower courts should determine whether a narrower injunction is appropriate" and "move expeditiously" to ensure that the injunction comports with the "principles of equity" described in CASA, id. slip op. at 19, 26 (emphasis added), we conclude that it is prudent to remand to the District Court, while retaining our jurisdiction over the appeal. The remand is for the limited purpose of enabling the District Court to consider the bearing, if any, of that guidance in CASA on the scope of the preliminary injunction in No. 25-1170 and to act accordingly. In doing so, we expect the District Court to address any arguments that the parties may advance with respect to what grounds may now be asserted regarding the injunction's scope. For these reasons, the Motion is denied, and the matter is remanded to the District Court for the limited purposes described herein, with this court retaining jurisdiction. We understand the District Court will act promptly in accordance with the briefing schedule that it entered on July 2, 2025. (MAP) (Entered: 07/06/2025)

NOTICE of Appearance by Kathleen Jacobs on behalf of Michelle King, Marco Rubio, Donald J. Trump, US Department of State, US Social Security Administration (Jacobs, Kathleen) (Entered: 07/09/2025)

Assented to MOTION for Extension of Time to August 11, 2025 to File Answer re 1 Complaint, by Michelle King, Marco Rubio, Donald J. Trump, US Department of State, US Social Security Administration. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Jacobs, Kathleen) (Entered: 07/09/2025)

Order on Motion for Extension of Time to Answer

Notice of Withdrawal of Appearance