<![CDATA[courts]]><![CDATA[Evening Docket]]><![CDATA[lawfare]]><![CDATA[Trump administration]]>Featured

The Evening Docket – Twofer Tuesday With Some Wins for the Admin. – RedState

admin
April 29, 2025
0Points
0
0
The Evening Docket (April 24, 2025)

Much to my consternation, I was not able to muster the energy Monday night to put together an Evening Docket edition. The good news is: There wasn’t a ton of activity over the weekend. That said, the court rulings were plentiful enough Monday and Tuesday that this twofer edition of the Docket is going to wind up a tad on the lengthy side — but it does at least include some wins (albeit small ones) for the Trump administration. 





It seems to me the easiest way to scan these visually is via the tweets, so I’m sticking with that format for the time being. And I’m going to arrange the cases in alphabetical rather than chronological order. 

So, here’s what we have for the past few days in terms of substantive rulings or dispositions:

First up, a small, partial victory for the administration:

  • In the case of American Association of University Professors v. Rubio (challenging the removal of foreign national protesters pursuant to executive orders 14161 (Protecting the United States From Foreign Terrorists and Other National Security and Public Safety Threats) and 14188 (Additional Measures to Combat Anti-Semitism)), Judge William Young (Massachusetts) granted the administration’s motion to dismiss…in part. He granted the dismissal as to Count III of the plaintiffs’ complaint (asserting a 5th Amendment violation), but denied it as to Counts I, II, and IV (asserting 1st Amendment and Administrative Procedure Act (APA) violations). So…a small, but not complete, victory for the administration.

And another small victory: 

  • In Associated Press v. Budowich (challenging the administration’s denial of press (AP) access to the White House), Judge Trevor McFadden (D.C.) granted the administration’s request for a stay pending appeal. (It likely helped that the plaintiff consented to the stay.)





This one’s sort of a wash — the status quo remains: 

  • In Climate United Fund v. Citibank (challenging the denial of federal grants), the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals set an expedited briefing and argument schedule (with argument set for May 19), and kept in place the administrative stay it granted on April 16.

And a not terribly surprising decision out of California:

  • In Community Legal Services in East Palo Alto v. HHS (challenging contract termination of funding allocated to legal services for unaccompanied children in immigration proceedings), Judge Araceli Martínez-Olguín (Northern District of California) granted the plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction. 

Then we have a bit of a puzzler out of the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals: 

  • In D.B.U. v. Trump (an immigration/habeas case), the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals entered an order denying the administration’s motion for stay pending appeal. Margot Cleveland has an informative X thread on what the 10th Circuit did here. 





Another small-ish victory for the administration: 

  • In Doe v. McHenry (involving the housing of transgender inmates), Judge Royce Lamberth (D.C. granted the administration’s motion for stay pending appeal. (As in the case involving the AP, the plaintiffs consented to the motion…which always helps.)

I suspect they’ll take it: 

  • In Dogan v. Noem (challenging the administration’s termination of student visa (SEVIS) records, the plaintiff voluntarily dismissed her case following the administration’s reactivation of the records. 

The court would like some answers in this one: 

  • In D.V.D. v. DHS (challenging deportation), Judge Brian Murphy (Massachusetts) issued an order granting expedited discovery on the limited issue of what sort of notice was provided to the plaintiff regarding his removal to Mexico and what his response to that notice was.





Speaking of washes: 

  • In Khalil v. Joyce (challenging removal proceedings against a pro-Hamas activist), the immigration court found Khalil removable, but…
  • …now the New Jersey District Court Judge Michael Farbiarz has determined that he has jurisdiction to hear Khalil’s habeas petition because a formal order for removal hasn’t been entered, so…

This one’s a weird one I couldn’t initially figure out (and haven’t had the time to really dissect): 

  • In National Treasury Employees Union v. Vought (challenging the dismantling of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau), the D.C. Circuit lifted part of its previously issued stay, and then D.C. District Court Judge Amy Berman Jackson denied the plaintiffs’ motion to enforce the preliminary injunction as moot. 

This one’s another small win for the administration: 





  • In Ozturk v. Hyde (the Turkish student/protestor at Tufts challenging her removal), the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals issued a temporary stay of the district court’s order requiring that she be returned to Vermont. 

This one’s a loss with a hefty price tag (although, in D.C. dollars, maybe not): 

  • In RFE/RL v. Lake, Judge Royce Lamberth (D.C.) entered an order granting a TRO requiring the administration to disburse $12,178,590 in congressionally appropriated funds to cover RFE/RL’s April expenditures. 

Another win of sorts: 

  • In University of California Student Association v. Carter (asserting improper disclosure of personal financial records to DOGE), Judge Randolph Moss (D.C.) entered an order dismissing the case without prejudice after the plaintiff filed a motion to voluntarily dismiss the case. 

And another win of sorts: 

  • In U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops v. U.S. Department of State, the plaintiff voluntarily dismissed its appeal of D.C. District Court Judge Trevor McFadden’s order denying its motion for a preliminary injunction. 





A bit more on that two-year-old U.S. citizen who was removed from the country with her illegal immigrant mother — and some insight into why a conservative judge (author of that spectacular July 4, 2023, decision in Missouri v. Biden) pressed pause to ask some questions: 

  • In V.M.L. v. Harper, Judge Terry Doughty (Western District of Louisiana) issued a clarifying order setting forth the factual determinations he believes need to be made in the case in order to properly resolve it. 

Montana saved the day on Friday and continued in that vein on Monday: 

  • In Webber v. DHS (challenging Trump’s tariffs), Judge Dana Christensen, having previously granted the administration’s motion to transfer the case to the Court of International Trade, denied the plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction pending appeal. 

And last but not least, one more small win: 

  • In Widakuswara v. U.S. (challenging the dismantling of the United States Agency for Global Media (USAGM)), the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals denied the plaintiffs’ motion to strike the administration’s motion for a stay pending appeal. 





And this article’s long enough that I’m not going to add in the newly filed cases — we’ll save those for a pithier edition. 

You can check out prior installments of The Evening Docket series here.


Editor’s Note: Partisan federal judges are hijacking President Trump’s agenda and insulting the will of the people

Help us expose out-of-control judges dead set on halting President Trump’s mandate for change. Join RedState VIP and use promo code FIGHT to get 60% off your membership.





Source link

admin

Related Posts

1 of 364

TRENDING

Copyright © 2025 conservdailyusa - .
Copyright © 2025 conservdailyusa - .