[ARCHIVED - September 2025]
Two consolidated appeals are at issue here, both concerning preliminary injunctions issued by the district court to prohibit the Trump Administration from dismantling the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP) by cutting funding to it and prohibiting most refugees from being resettled through it. The case was brought by Church World Service, HIAS, and Lutheran Community Services Northwest, and nine individual plaintiffs, all represented by the International Refugee Assistance Project.
On March 25, 2025, the Ninth Circuit granted in part and denied in part the federal government’s request to stay (pause) the district court’s first preliminary injunction, leaving it in place as to all refugees who had been conditionally approved for resettlement to the United States before January 20, 2025 (the day President Trump was inaugurated). There are more than 100,000 such individuals. The government subsequently asked the Ninth Circuit to to “clarify” that order, to make clear that the Trump Administration only has to admit refugees who had confirmable travel plans within two weeks of January 20, 2025 (which would reduce the number of refugees covered by the district court’s injunction to approximately 160 individuals). The Ninth Circuit did this on May 9, 2025, ordering the district court to interpret its March 25, 2025 order narrowly, “on a case-by-case basis, to apply to individuals with a strong reliance interest arising prior to January 20, 2025, comparable to Plaintiff Pacito.” On May 15, 2025, the district court dutifully narrowed its order, instructing the federal government to process, admit, and provide resettlement services to the 160 previously identified individuals who had confirmable travel plans within two weeks of January 20, 2025, and establishing a method to appoint a special master who will determine whether other refugees are covered by the district court’s injunction, as narrowed and clarified by the Ninth Circuit .
As of June 17, 2025, the parties have completed the opening briefing. Oral argument on the appeal has been set for September 19, 2025.
On July 17, 2025, following the district court’s order establishing a framework for injunction implementation, the government moved the Court of Appeals to enforce or further clarify its March 25 order, or amend it to fully stay the injunctions at issue. The government claims the compliance framework order is excessively burdensome and construes the Court of Appeal’s orders in an overly broad way. On July 19, the Court of Appeals issued an administrative stay pending the resolution of the motion. This put a temporary pause on the injunction implementation framework.
Technical Summary:
The Complaint challenges the executive order and the defendant agencies’ implementation of the order because (1) it violates the Refugee Act; (2) the agency action taken to effectuate the order is arbitrary and capricious under the APA for failing to go through the proper notice and comment procedures in violation of the APA and contrary to law in violation of the APA and INA; (3) it failed to abide by applicable regulations under the Accardi doctrine; (4) violates the Fifth Amendment of the Due Process Clause; and (5) violates the separation of powers.
