Case: Doe v. McHenry

1:25-cv-00286 | U.S. District Court for the District of District of Columbia

Filed Date: Jan. 30, 2025

Case Ongoing

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

This case challenged the Trump Administration's implementation of Executive Order (EO) 14168, sections 4(a) and 4(c), banning transgender women from being housed in women's prisons and gender affirming medical care for inmates. The plaintiffs were three transgender women incarcerated in federal prison. The plaintiffs were housed in women’s facilities throughout their incarceration. They had each lived as a woman for many years and had consistently received hormone therapy, deemed medically necessary by their doctors. The plaintiffs had noticeable feminine characteristics from hormone therapy and feminizing surgery. After the Executive Order was issued, the plaintiffs were abruptly removed from the general prison population and placed in a segregated unit, awaiting transfer to a men’s facility. Represented by the National Center for Lesbian Rights, GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders, and law firms (pro bono), the plaintiffs filed this lawsuit in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. The plaintiffs sued the U.S. Attorney General and the Director of the Federal Bureau of Prisons. The complaint alleged that the newly signed EO14168 violated the plaintiffs’ constitutional and statutory rights by ordering their transfer to a men’s prison and banning their access to medically necessary gender-affirming care. The complaint requested a declaration that Sections 4(a) and (c) of the EO violated the Fifth and Eighth Amendments, the Rehabilitation Act, and the Administrative Procedure Act. It also requested the court halt enforcement of Sections 4(a) and 4(c), preserve the plaintiff's current housing and medical treatment, and award nominal damages, attorneys’ fees, and costs. The case was assigned to Chief Judge James E. Boasburg.

On January 20, 2025, President Trump issued Executive Order 14168, titled “Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government.” Section 2 of the Order redefined “sex” narrowly as immutable biological characteristics fixed at conception, thereby denying legal recognition to transgender people. Section 4(a) barred all transgender women from being housed in women’s prisons. Section 4(c) prohibited the use of federal funds for any medical treatment intended to align an inmate’s appearance with their gender identity, effectively banning hormone therapy and gender-affirming care for transgender prisoners.

On January 30, 2025, the plaintiffs filed their complaint. The complaint alleged that the EO and the defendants’ enforcement of it violated the plaintiffs’ rights under the Fifth Amendment’s guarantee of equal protection, the Eighth Amendment’s protection against cruel and unusual punishment, the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, and the Administrative Procedure Act (APA). The Fifth Amendment was violated because Sections 4(a) and (c) facially discriminated on the basis of sex and transgender status without legitimate justification. The Eighth Amendment (Failure to Protect) was violated because the EO forced the transfer that placed the plaintiffs at a known and substantial risk of sexual violence. Further, plaintiffs were at risk of losing access to hormone therapy and gender-affirming care, which was deliberately indifferent to their serious medical needs, and put them at risk for serious harm. The EO violated the Rehabilitation Act because it denied reasonable accommodation for a recognized disability (gender dysphoria). Finally, the BOP’s actions were arbitrary, capricious, and contrary to existing federal regulations without the notice-and-comment procedures, thereby violating the Administrative Procedure Act.

On January 30, 2025, the plaintiffs also filed an emergency motion for a temporary restraining order (TRO) and preliminary injunction to prevent enforcement of the EO. In this motion, the plaintiffs argued that transfer to a men’s prison would put them at a high risk of physical and sexual assault, and that the cessation of gender affirming care would exacerbate their gender dysphoria and put them at a high risk of self harm or suicidality.

On January 30, the plaintiffs also filed a motion to seal the case and a motion for a protective order. The motion to seal was granted in part and denied in part on January 31; the plaintiffs were allowed to proceed under pseudonyms, and all information that would identify the plaintiffs was ordered to be redacted on the public record and sealed for the court.

On February 3, the case was reassigned to Judge Royce C. Lamberth.

On February 4, the court granted the TRO. The court found that the plaintiffs would face a high risk of sexual and physical assault, as well as worsening physical and mental health if they were transferred to men’s prisons and denied hormone therapy and gender affirming care. It also found that the defendants were aware of this risk, citing the Prison Rape Elimation Act (PREA) that allows some transgender women to be housed in women’s because of the risk of assault, and the defendants’ plan to put the plaintiffs in prisons with lower rates of violence. It found that defendants' response to the risk was not reasonable, because, rather than avoid creating risk to the plaintiffs by maintaining the status quo, they planned to create risk to the plaintiffs by transferring them and then attempt to mitigate harm after the fact. It enjoined the defendants from implementing Sections 4(a) and 4(c) of the Executive Order against the plaintiffs and required the defendants to maintain the plaintiffs’ housing and medical care as it existed immediately prior to January 20. 763 F.Supp.3d 81. On February 18, the court granted the plaintiffs’ preliminary injunction, noting that the defendants had provided no new information that would change the conditions under which the TRO was granted. The preliminary injunction also enjoined the defendants from implementing Sections 4(a) and 4(c) and required the defendants to maintain the plaintiffs’ housing and medical care. 2025 WL 596651.

The plaintiffs amended their complaint on February 21, 2025. The first amended complaint added nine plaintiffs, also transgender women incarcerated in women’s prisons. The amended complaint alleged that on February 20, the plaintiffs were told they would be imminently transferred to men’s prisons. The amended complaint requested declaratory judgement, a preliminary injunction, and a permanent injunction. On February 21, the plaintiffs also filed expanded motions for preliminary injunction and TRO to include the newly added plaintiffs. The court granted the expanded TRO and preliminary injunction on February 24, 2025.

On February 27, the court granted the plaintiffs’ motion for a protective order, prohibiting defendants or third parties from revealing information that could identify the plaintiffs.

The plaintiffs filed a second amended complaint and another motion for a TRO on March 14, 2025. The second amended complaint added two plaintiffs, transgender women who were transferred to men’s prisons. The TRO requested that the government transfer the two plaintiffs back to women’s prisons and restore or preserve their access to gender affirming care. On March 18, the plaintiffs motioned to convert the TRO to a preliminary injunction and TRO. On March 19, the court allowed the second amended complaint and granted the preliminary injunction and TRO. It ordered the defendants to transfer the two new plaintiffs to women’s prisons and reinstate or continue their gender affirming care.

On April 2, the defendants appealed the preliminary injunctions to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit Court (Case Number 25-5099). On April 25, the district court stayed proceedings while awaiting the appellate court’s decision.

On April 30, the D.C. Circuit consolidated this case with Moe v. Trump and Jones v. Trump and placed the consolidated cases on an expedited briefing schedule. While the appeal proceeded, the district court issued a protective order on April 29. This order superseded the previous protective order, but largely served the same purpose with clearer guidelines on what could be made public and how. On May 12, one plaintiff voluntarily dismissed her claims without prejudice.

On May 15, the district court renewed the preliminary injunction. To keep things procedurally clear, defendants appealed the renewed preliminary injunction to the D.C. Circuit on June 4 (Case Number 25-05213), consolidating the new appeal with prior related matters. While the appeal was pending, the district court stayed proceedings and renewed the preliminary injunctions each time they were due to expire (every 90 days under the PLRA. The defendants appealed each renewed preliminary injunction.

On September 10, 2025, the D.C. Circuit filed a per curiam order asking the parties for supplemental briefing addressing whether the district court had the power to renew its preliminary injunctions under the PLRA, and if so, how that would affect the court’s jurisdiction over this appeal. Both parties filed briefing supporting the district court’s authority in renewing its preliminary injunction, and asserting that the district court’s power to renew the preliminary injunction did not affect the D.C. Circuit’s jurisdiction to review the operative injunction.

Another plaintiff voluntarily dismissed her claim without prejudice on January 23, 2026. On April 7, 2026, a plaintiff passed away and was removed from the case as a party.

On April 17, 2026, the D.C. Circuit court vacated the preliminary injunctions still in effect and remanded the cases for further proceedings. The court dismissed the appeals regarding the expired preliminary injunctions as moot. As to the preliminary injunctions still in effect, the court found that the district court granted the preliminary injunctions based on the argument that transgender women in general must be housed in women's prisons, not the plaintiffs’ actual argument that they, as opposed to transgender women in general, had individual characteristics that require them to be housed in women’s prisons. The court explained that for the preliminary injunctions to stand, the district court must make findings based on the plaintiffs individual characteristics that put them at a high risk of serious harm in a men’s prison to prove the merits of their Eighth Amendment claims, and that it had not yet made those determinations. The case was remanded to the district court for further fact finding as to each individual plaintiff. The mandate was set to issue on June 8, 2026. 172 F.4th 901.

On May 13, 2026, the district court consolidated this case with Moe v. Trump, and Jones v. Trump, with this case as the lead case.

The operative preliminary injunction was set to expire on May 20, 2026. The plaintiffs filed another motion for a preliminary injunction on May 13. Unlike the previous motions for extensions, the defendants opposed this motion, alleging that the district court lacked jurisdiction over renewing the preliminary injunction because it was technically still at issue on appeal. On May 19, the court denied the defendants’ argument and granted a preliminary judgement from May 21 to June 8, when the mandate from the appellate court would issue. The court enjoined the defendants from implementing Sections 4(a) and 4(c) against any plaintiff until June 8. The court also ordered a briefing schedule for a new preliminary injunction based on evidence of individual characteristics as required by the appellate court.

On May 21, 2026, the district court sua sponte ordered a stay on the plaintiffs’ challenge to 4(c) of the Executive Order, pending final adjudication of Kingdom v. Trump, a class action case in the D.C. District Court assigned to Judge Lamberth. In that case, the court issued an injunction enjoining the government from implementing a policy pursuant to section 4(c) that would terminate hormone therapy for transgender inmates.

Between May 21 and June 7, the plaintiffs in the consolidated action submitted various evidence and declarations supporting individualized showings of the risk of imminent harm. The plaintiffs alleged that their individual characteristics placed each of them at a high risk for serious injury if transferred to a men’s prison, and that the defendants knew of and purposefully disregarded that risk.

On June 3, 2026, the defendants notified the court of a preliminary injunction in Fleming v. Warden T. Rule, a case in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas, that required the transgender women incarcerated in that prison to be housed separately and kept on separate routing and scheduling to avoid crossing paths with cisgender female inmates. On June 5, the Fleming plaintiffs, incarcerated cisgender women, filed a motion to intervene in this consolidated case as defendants, noting that four of the plaintiffs in this lawsuit are housed in the same prison as the Fleming intervenors. Both the plaintiffs and the defendants in this lawsuit opposed intervention.

On June 7, the district court issued a preliminary injunction, enjoining the defendants from implementing section 4(a) of the Executive Order against the plaintiffs. The court found that each plaintiff provided individualized evidence demonstrating they would likely prevail on their Eighth Amendment claims. The court found that the plaintiffs would be at an increased risk of violence and severely exacerbated gender dysphoria, that the defendants knew of this risk, and that mandating transfer was not a reasonable response to the risk because maintaining the status quo would require less resources than transfer and pose less risk of harm to the plaintiffs. The court’s made individualized findings for each plaintiff, which were redacted. The court held that its injunction did not conflict with the Fleming injunction because it only enjoined the government from transferring the plaintiffs to men’s prisons and did not require the plaintiffs to be housed alongside or share spaces with cisgender female inmates. Because of the injunction issued in Fleming and the non-conflicting preliminary injunctions in this case, the court did not rule on the motion to intervene. 2026 WL 1642068.

	Document
1 1:25-cv-00286	Complaint	Jan. 30, 2025	Jan. 30, 2025 Complaint
7 1:25-cv-00286	Memorandum Opinion and Order	Jan. 31, 2025	Jan. 31, 2025 Order/Opinion 2025 WL 596650
13 1:25-cv-00286	Plaintiffs' Motion for Emergency Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction Doe v. McHenry III	Feb. 3, 2025	Feb. 3, 2025 Pleading / Motion / Brief
13-1 1:25-cv-00286	Motion for TRO Doe v. McHenry III	Feb. 3, 2025	Feb. 3, 2025 Pleading / Motion / Brief
23 1:25-cv-00286	Order on motion for TRO Doe v. McHenry III	Feb. 4, 2025	Feb. 4, 2025 Order/Opinion 763 F.Supp.3d 81
44 1:25-cv-00286	Order on Motion for Preliminary Injunction	Feb. 18, 2025	Feb. 18, 2025 Order/Opinion 2025 WL 596651
47 1:25-cv-00286	First Amended Complaint Doe v. Bondi	Feb. 21, 2025	Feb. 21, 2025 Complaint
50 1:25-cv-00286	Plaintiffs’ Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and Expanded Preliminary Injunction Doe v. Bondi	Feb. 21, 2025	Feb. 21, 2025 Pleading / Motion / Brief
50-1 1:25-cv-00286	Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support of Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and Expanded Preliminary Injunction	Feb. 21, 2025	Feb. 21, 2025 Pleading / Motion / Brief
54 1:25-cv-00286	Plaintiffs’ Reply Brief in Support of Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction Doe v. Bondi	Feb. 24, 2025	Feb. 24, 2025 Pleading / Motion / Brief

ECF Number	Description	Date	Link Date / Link
1	COMPLAINT against WILLIAM LOTHROP, JAMES R. MCHENRY III ( Filing fee $ 405 receipt number ADCDC-11444829) filed by JANE DOE, SARA DOE, MARY DOE. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet, # 2 Summons - James R. McHenry III, Acting AG, # 3 Summons - William Lothrop, Acting Director, Federal BOP, # 4 Summons - Edward R. Martin Jr., U.S. Attorney for DC, # 5 Motion to File Under Seal and for Protective Order, # 6 Memorandum in Support of Motion to Seal, # 7 Text of Proposed Order)(Hill, Eve) (Entered: 01/30/2025) 1 Civil Cover Sheet View on PACER 2 Summons - James R. McHenry III, Acting AG View on PACER 3 Summons - William Lothrop, Acting Director, Federal BOP View on PACER 4 Summons - Edward R. Martin Jr., U.S. Attorney for DC View on PACER 5 Motion to File Under Seal and for Protective Order View on PACER 6 Memorandum in Support of Motion to Seal View on PACER 7 Text of Proposed Order View on PACER	Jan. 30, 2025	Jan. 30, 2025 Clearinghouse
2	MOTION to File Under Seal Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction by JANE DOE, MARY DOE, SARA DOE. (Attachments: # 1 Memorandum in Support, # 2 Text of Proposed Order)(Hill, Eve) Modified event on 1/30/2025 (znmw). (Entered: 01/30/2025) 1 Memorandum in Support View on RECAP 2 Text of Proposed Order View on PACER	Jan. 30, 2025	Jan. 30, 2025
3	MOTION for Leave to Proceed Under Pseudonyms by JANE DOE, MARY DOE, SARA DOE. (Attachments: # 1 Memorandum in Support, # 2 Text of Proposed Order)(Hill, Eve) Modified event on 1/30/2025 (znmw). (Entered: 01/30/2025) 1 Memorandum in Support View on PACER 2 Text of Proposed Order View on PACER	Jan. 30, 2025	Jan. 30, 2025 RECAP
4	NOTICE Corrected Summonses - Summons - James R. McHenry III by JANE DOE, MARY DOE, SARA DOE re 1 Complaint,, (Attachments: # 1 Summons - William Lothrop, # 2 Summons - Edward R. Martin Jr.)(Hill, Eve) (Entered: 01/30/2025) 1 Summons - William Lothrop View on RECAP 2 Summons - Edward R. Martin Jr. View on RECAP	Jan. 30, 2025	Jan. 30, 2025
5	SEALED MOTION for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction filed by JANE DOE, MARY DOE, SARA DOE (Attachments: # 1 Memorandum in Support, # 2 Declaration of Eve Hill, # 3 Declaration of Loren Schechter, MD, # 4 Declaration of Jane Doe, # 5 Declaration of Ivana Kuc, # 6 Declaration of Frederic M. Ettner, MD, # 7 Text of Proposed Order)(Hill, Eve) Modified docket text on 1/31/2025 (znmw). (Entered: 01/30/2025)	Jan. 30, 2025	Jan. 30, 2025
6	MOTION for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice :Attorney Name- Jennifer L. Levi, Filing fee $ 100, receipt number ADCDC-11446078. Fee Status: Fee Paid. by JANE DOE, MARY DOE, SARA DOE. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration for Pro Hac Vice Admission, # 2 Supplemental Statement ISO Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice, # 3 Certificate of Good Standing, # 4 Text of Proposed Order)(Hill, Eve) (Entered: 01/30/2025) 1 Declaration for Pro Hac Vice Admission View on RECAP 2 Supplemental Statement ISO Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice View on RECAP 3 Certificate of Good Standing View on RECAP 4 Text of Proposed Order View on RECAP	Jan. 30, 2025	Jan. 30, 2025
7	ORDER: The Court ORDERS that: 1) Plaintiffs' 2 Motion to Seal and 3 Motion to Proceed Under Pseudonyms are GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART; 2) All parties shall use the pseudonyms listed in the Complaint in all documents filed in this action; 3) Plaintiffs' 1 redacted Complaint shall remain on the public docket; 4) Their 5 unredacted TRO Motion shall remain under seal for now; and 5) Within five days of this Order, Plaintiffs shall file on the public docket a redacted version of their 5 Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction and associated documents; an unredacted version of their Complaint, filed under seal; and a declaration containing their real names and residential addresses, filed under seal. Signed by Chief Judge James E. Boasberg on January 31, 2025. (lcjeb3) (Entered: 01/31/2025)	Jan. 31, 2025	Jan. 31, 2025 Clearinghouse
8	SUMMONS (3) Issued Electronically as to All Defendants, U.S. Attorney and U.S. Attorney General (Attachments: # 1 Notice and Consent)(zmtm) (Entered: 02/03/2025) 1 Notice and Consent View on RECAP	Feb. 3, 2025	Feb. 3, 2025
9	ORDER: Upon consideration of the Motion 6 for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice, and the entire record herein, it is hereby ORDERED that the Motion is GRANTED. Counsel should register for e-filing via PACER and file a notice of appearance pursuant to LCvR 83.6(a) Click for instructions. Signed by Judge Royce C. Lamberth on 02/03/2025. (lcrcl2) (Main Document 9 replaced on 2/3/2025) (zsmc). (Entered: 02/03/2025)	Feb. 3, 2025	Feb. 3, 2025
10	NOTICE of Appearance by Jennifer Levi on behalf of JANE DOE, MARY DOE, SARA DOE (Levi, Jennifer) (Entered: 02/03/2025)	Feb. 3, 2025	Feb. 3, 2025
11	Memorandum in opposition to re 5 Sealed Motion, for Temporary Restraining Order or Preliminary Injunction filed by JAMES R. MCHENRY, III, WILLIAM LOTHROP. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1-Declaration of Rick Stover, # 2 Exhibit 2-2018 Transgender Offender Manual, # 3 Exhibit 3-2022 Transgender Offender Manual, # 4 Exhibit 4-Keohane v. Dixon Order, # 5 Text of Proposed Order)(Lin, Jean) (Entered: 02/03/2025) 1 Exhibit 1-Declaration of Rick Stover View on RECAP 2 Exhibit 2-2018 Transgender Offender Manual View on RECAP 3 Exhibit 3-2022 Transgender Offender Manual View on PACER 4 Exhibit 4-Keohane v. Dixon Order View on PACER 5 Text of Proposed Order View on PACER	Feb. 3, 2025	Feb. 3, 2025 Clearinghouse
12	ENTERED IN ERROR.....SEALED MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE DOCUMENT UNDER SEAL filed by JAMES R. MCHENRY, III, WILLIAM LOTHROP (This document is SEALED and only available to authorized persons.) (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Sealed declaration of Rick Stover, # 2 Text of Proposed Order)(Lin, Jean) Modified on 2/4/2025 (zdp). (Entered: 02/03/2025)	Feb. 3, 2025	Feb. 3, 2025
13	MOTION for Temporary Restraining Order, MOTION for Preliminary Injunction by JANE DOE, MARY DOE, SARA DOE. (Attachments: # 1 Memorandum in Support, # 2 Exhibit Declaration of Eve Hill (Redacted), # 3 Exhibit Declaration of Loren Schechter (Redacted), # 4 Exhibit Declaration of Jane Doe (Redacted), # 5 Exhibit Declaration (Redacted), # 6 Exhibit Declaration of Frederic M. Ettner, MD, # 7 Text of Proposed Order)(Hill, Eve) (Entered: 02/03/2025) 1 Memorandum in Support View on RECAP 2 Exhibit Declaration of Eve Hill (Redacted) View on RECAP 3 Exhibit Declaration of Loren Schechter (Redacted) View on RECAP 4 Exhibit Declaration of Jane Doe (Redacted) View on RECAP 5 Exhibit Declaration (Redacted) View on RECAP 6 Exhibit Declaration of Frederic M. Ettner, MD View on RECAP 7 Text of Proposed Order View on RECAP	Feb. 3, 2025	Feb. 3, 2025 Clearinghouse
14	NOTICE of Appearance by John Robinson on behalf of JAMES R. MCHENRY, III, WILLIAM LOTHROP (Robinson, John) (Entered: 02/03/2025)	Feb. 3, 2025	Feb. 3, 2025 RECAP
15	MOTION for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice :Attorney Name- Sarah K. Austin, Filing fee $ 100, receipt number ADCDC-11453369. Fee Status: Fee Paid. by JANE DOE, MARY DOE, SARA DOE. (Attachments: # 1 Certification of Sarah K. Austin, # 2 Certificate of Good Standing, # 3 Text of Proposed Order)(Hill, Eve) (Entered: 02/03/2025) 1 Certification of Sarah K. Austin View on PACER 2 Certificate of Good Standing View on PACER 3 Text of Proposed Order View on PACER	Feb. 3, 2025	Feb. 3, 2025 RECAP
	Case Assigned to Judge Royce C. Lamberth. (zmtm)	Feb. 3, 2025	Feb. 3, 2025
	Case Assigned to Judge Royce C. Lamberth. (zmtm)	Feb. 3, 2025	Feb. 3, 2025
	NOTICE OF HEARING: Motion Hearing set for 2/4/2025 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 15 (In Person) before Judge Royce C. Lamberth. (smc)	Feb. 3, 2025	Feb. 3, 2025
16	SEALED DOCUMENT filed by JANE DOE, MARY DOE, SARA DOE re 1 Complaint,, (This document is SEALED and only available to authorized persons.)(Hill, Eve) (Entered: 02/04/2025)	Feb. 4, 2025	Feb. 4, 2025
17	MOTION for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice :Attorney Name- Kara J. Janssen, Filing fee $ 100, receipt number ADCDC-11456399. Fee Status: Fee Paid. by JANE DOE, MARY DOE, SARA DOE. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration for PHV Admission - Kara J. Janssen, # 2 Certificate of Good Standing, # 3 Text of Proposed Order)(Hill, Eve) (Entered: 02/04/2025) 1 Declaration for PHV Admission - Kara J. Janssen View on RECAP 2 Certificate of Good Standing View on RECAP 3 Text of Proposed Order View on RECAP	Feb. 4, 2025	Feb. 4, 2025 RECAP
18	MOTION for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice :Attorney Name- Adrienne Spiegel, Filing fee $ 100, receipt number ADCDC-11456420. Fee Status: Fee Paid. by JANE DOE, MARY DOE, SARA DOE. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration for PHV Admission - Adrienne Spiegel, # 2 Certificate of Good Standing, # 3 Text of Proposed Order)(Hill, Eve) (Entered: 02/04/2025) 1 Declaration for PHV Admission - Adrienne Spiegel View on RECAP 2 Certificate of Good Standing View on RECAP 3 Text of Proposed Order View on RECAP	Feb. 4, 2025	Feb. 4, 2025 RECAP
19	SEALED DOCUMENT filed by JANE DOE, MARY DOE, SARA DOE re 1 Complaint,, (This document is SEALED and only available to authorized persons.)(Hill, Eve) (Entered: 02/04/2025)	Feb. 4, 2025	Feb. 4, 2025
20	ERRATA by JANE DOE, MARY DOE, SARA DOE re 1 Complaint,,. (Attachments: # 1 Errata - Complaint)(Hill, Eve) (Entered: 02/04/2025) 1 Errata - Complaint View on RECAP	Feb. 4, 2025	Feb. 4, 2025 RECAP
21	ERRATA by JANE DOE, MARY DOE, SARA DOE re 13 Motion for TRO,, Motion for Preliminary Injunction,. (Attachments: # 1 Memorandum in Support (Errata))(Hill, Eve) (Entered: 02/04/2025) 1 Memorandum in Support (Errata) View on RECAP	Feb. 4, 2025	Feb. 4, 2025 RECAP
22	MOTION for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice :Attorney Name- Benjamin Hattem, Filing fee $ 100, receipt number ADCDC-11456563. Fee Status: Fee Paid. by JANE DOE, MARY DOE, SARA DOE. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration Benjamin Hattem, # 2 Certificate of Good Standing, # 3 Text of Proposed Order)(Hill, Eve) (Entered: 02/04/2025) 1 Declaration Benjamin Hattem View on RECAP 2 Certificate of Good Standing View on RECAP 3 Text of Proposed Order View on RECAP	Feb. 4, 2025	Feb. 4, 2025 RECAP
23	MEMORANDUM & ORDER: Upon consideration of the plaintiffs' Motion 13 for a Temporary Restraining Order, the defendants' Opposition 11 thereto, and the entire record herein, and for the reasons contained in this Memorandum and Order, it is hereby ORDERED that the Motion is GRANTED; and it is further ORDERED that the defendants are temporarily enjoined and restrained from implementing Sections 4(a) and 4(c) of Executive Order 14168 as to the plaintiffs, pending further Order of this Court; and it is further ORDERED that, pending further Order of this Court, defendants shall maintain and continue the plaintiffs' housing status and medical care as they existed immediately prior to January 20, 2025. Signed by Judge Royce C. Lamberth on 02/04/2025. (lcrcl2) (Entered: 02/04/2025)	Feb. 4, 2025	Feb. 4, 2025 Clearinghouse
	NOTICE of AMENDED HEARING: Motion Hearing reset for 2/4/2025 at 11:00 AM (same day, different time) in Courtroom 15 (In Person) before Judge Royce C. Lamberth. (smc)	Feb. 4, 2025	Feb. 4, 2025
	Minute Entry for Motion Hearing held on 2/4/2025 before Judge Royce C. Lamberth: re 13 MOTION for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction. Oral arguments heard and TAKEN UNDER ADVISEMENT. Court Reporter: Lisa Edwards. (smc)	Feb. 4, 2025	Feb. 4, 2025
	NOTICE OF ERROR regarding 12 SEALED MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE DOCUMENT UNDER SEAL filed by JAMES R. MCHENRY, III, WILLIAM LOTHROP (This document is SEALED and only available to authorized persons.). The following error(s) need correction: Invalid attorney signature- signature on document must match PACER login. Please refile. (zdp)	Feb. 4, 2025	Feb. 4, 2025
24	SEALED MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE DOCUMENT UNDER SEAL filed by JAMES R. MCHENRY, III, WILLIAM LOTHROP (This document is SEALED and only available to authorized persons.) (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Declaration of Rick Stover (sealed), # 2 Text of Proposed Order)(Robinson, John) (Entered: 02/05/2025)	Feb. 5, 2025	Feb. 5, 2025
25	MOTION for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice :Attorney Name- Amy Whelan, Filing fee $ 100, receipt number ADCDC-11458891. Fee Status: Fee Paid. by JANE DOE, MARY DOE, SARA DOE. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration for PHV Admission - Amy Whelan, # 2 Certificate of Good Standing, # 3 Text of Proposed Order)(Hill, Eve) (Entered: 02/05/2025) 1 Declaration for PHV Admission - Amy Whelan View on RECAP 2 Certificate of Good Standing View on RECAP 3 Text of Proposed Order View on RECAP	Feb. 5, 2025	Feb. 5, 2025 RECAP
	RESOLVED.....NOTICE of Provisional/Government Not Certified Status re 24 SEALED MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE DOCUMENT UNDER SEAL filed by JAMES R. MCHENRY, III, WILLIAM LOTHROP (This document is SEALED and only available to authorized persons.) (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit Declaration of Rick Stover (sealed), # (2) Text of Proposed Order)(Robinson, John).Your attorney renewal/government certification has not been received. As a result, your membership with the U.S. District & Bankruptcy Courts for the District of Columbia is not in good standing, and you are not permitted to file. Pursuant to Local Civil Rule 83.9, you must immediately correct your membership status by following the appropriate instructions on this page of our website: https://www.dcd.uscourts.gov/attorney-renewal. Please be advised that the presiding judge in this case has been notified that you are currently not in good standing to file in this court. Renewal Due by 2/12/2025. (zhcn) Modified on 2/6/2025 (zhcn).	Feb. 5, 2025	Feb. 5, 2025
	NOTICE of Provisional/Government Not Certified Status re 24 SEALED MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE DOCUMENT UNDER SEAL filed by JAMES R. MCHENRY, III, WILLIAM LOTHROP (This document is SEALED and only available to authorized persons.) (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Declaration of Rick Stover (sealed), # 2 Text of Proposed Order)(Robinson, John).Your attorney renewal/government certification has not been received. As a result, your membership with the U.S. District & Bankruptcy Courts for the District of Columbia is not in good standing, and you are not permitted to file. Pursuant to Local Civil Rule 83.9, you must immediately correct your membership status by following the appropriate instructions on this page of our website: https://www.dcd.uscourts.gov/attorney-renewal. Please be advised that the presiding judge in this case has been notified that you are currently not in good standing to file in this court. Renewal Due by 2/12/2025. (zhcn)	Feb. 5, 2025	Feb. 5, 2025
	RESOLVED.....NOTICE of Provisional/Government Not Certified Status re 24 SEALED MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE DOCUMENT UNDER SEAL filed by JAMES R. MCHENRY, III, WILLIAM LOTHROP (This document is SEALED and only available to authorized persons.) (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Declaration of Rick Stover (sealed), # 2 Text of Proposed Order)(Robinson, John).Your attorney renewal/government certification has not been received. As a result, your membership with the U.S. District & Bankruptcy Courts for the District of Columbia is not in good standing, and you are not permitted to file. Pursuant to Local Civil Rule 83.9, you must immediately correct your membership status by following the appropriate instructions on this page of our website: https://www.dcd.uscourts.gov/attorney-renewal. Please be advised that the presiding judge in this case has been notified that you are currently not in good standing to file in this court. Renewal Due by 2/12/2025. (zhcn) Modified on 2/6/2025 (zhcn).	Feb. 5, 2025	Feb. 5, 2025
26	MOTION for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice :Attorney Name- Ernest J. Galvan, Filing fee $ 100, receipt number ADCDC-11462000. Fee Status: Fee Paid. by JANE DOE, MARY DOE, SARA DOE. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration for PHV Admission - Ernest J. Galvan, # 2 Certificate of Good Standing, # 3 Text of Proposed Order)(Hill, Eve) (Entered: 02/06/2025) 1 Declaration for PHV Admission - Ernest J. Galvan View on RECAP 2 Certificate of Good Standing View on RECAP 3 Text of Proposed Order View on RECAP	Feb. 6, 2025	Feb. 6, 2025 RECAP
27	ORDER: Upon consideration of the Motion 15 for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice, it is hereby ORDERED that the Motion is GRANTED. Counsel should register for e-filing via PACER and file a notice of appearance pursuant to LCvR 83.6(a) Click for instructions. Signed by Judge Royce C. Lamberth on 02/06/2025. (lcrcl2) (Entered: 02/06/2025)	Feb. 6, 2025	Feb. 6, 2025
28	ORDER: Upon consideration of the Motion 17 for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice, it is hereby ORDERED that the Motion is GRANTED. Counsel should register for e-filing via PACER and file a notice of appearance pursuant to LCvR 83.6(a) Click for instructions. Signed by Judge Royce C. Lamberth on 02/06/2025. (lcrcl2) (Entered: 02/06/2025)	Feb. 6, 2025	Feb. 6, 2025
29	ORDER: Upon consideration of the Motion 18 for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice, it is hereby ORDERED that the Motion is GRANTED. Counsel should register for e-filing via PACER and file a notice of appearance pursuant to LCvR 83.6(a) Click for instructions. Signed by Judge Royce C. Lamberth on 02/06/2025. (lcrcl2) (Entered: 02/06/2025)	Feb. 6, 2025	Feb. 6, 2025
30	ORDER: Upon consideration of the Motion 22 for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice, it is hereby ORDERED that the Motion is GRANTED. Counsel should register for e-filing via PACER and file a notice of appearance pursuant to LCvR 83.6(a) Click for instructions. Signed by Judge Royce C. Lamberth on 02/06/2025. (lcrcl2) (Entered: 02/06/2025)	Feb. 6, 2025	Feb. 6, 2025
31	ORDER: Upon consideration of the Motion 25 for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice, it is hereby ORDERED that the Motion is GRANTED. Counsel should register for e-filing via PACER and file a notice of appearance pursuant to LCvR 83.6(a) Click for instructions. Signed by Judge Royce C. Lamberth on 02/06/2025. (lcrcl2) (Entered: 02/06/2025)	Feb. 6, 2025	Feb. 6, 2025

Case: Doe v. McHenry

1:25-cv-00286 | U.S. District Court for the District of District of Columbia

Case Summary

Related Cases

People

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Resources

Docket

Case Details