Immigration

Home Immigration

Attorney General Sues New York Over ‘Prioritizing Illegal Immigrants’

1
Governor Kathy Hochul and MTA Chair & CEO Janno Lieber make a subway safety announcement at the NYCT Rail Control Center (RCC) on Wednesday, Mar 6, 2024. (Marc A. Hermann / MTA)

Attorney General Pam Bondi Trump filed a lawsuit Wednesday against the state of New York and its governor, Kathy Hochul, and Attorney General Letitia James, alleging a failure to comply with federal law by shielding illegal immigrants.

Bondi said Democratic Governor Kathy Hochul, New York Attorney General Letitia James, and state DMV head Mark Schroeder treated their state’s residents like second-class citizens.

“We’re here today because we have filed charges against the state of New York,” Bondi said at a 5 p.m. ET news conference. “We have filed charges against Kathy Hochul. We have filed charges against Letitia James and Mark Schroeder, who is with DMV. This is a new DOJ, and we are taking steps to protect Americans – American citizens.”

Bondi invoked a similar suit the DOJ filed against the state of Illinois a week ago and added, “New York didn’t listen. So now, you’re next.”

“If you are a state not complying with federal law, you’re next,” she said. “Get ready. And the great men and women of law enforcement are standing behind me today. We have FBI, DEF, DEA, ATF agents. They put their lives on the line every single day to protect us.”

Bondi alleged New York had given a “green light to any illegal alien in New York where law enforcement officers cannot check their identity if they pull them over.” She concluded:

Law enforcement officers do not have access to their background, and if these great men and women pull over someone and don’t have access to their background, they have no idea who they’re dealing with, and it puts their lives on the line every single day. Violent criminals, gang members, drug traffickers, human smugglers will no longer terrorize the American people, and that is why we are here today. You will be held accountable if you do not follow federal law. It’s over, it ends, and we’re coming after you.

Trump Border Czar Lays Down The Law After Democrats Storm ICE Facility

4
By Gage Skidmore from Surprise, AZ, United States of America - Thomas Homan, CC BY-SA 2.0,

President Trump’s border czar issued a stark warning to Democrats who recently stormed a Newark, New Jersey, ICE facility in the name of an “oversight” visit.

Tom Homan’s warning came days after Democratic officials allegedly stormed the ICE facility

“If you cannot support ICE, shame on you. If you can support sanctuary cities, shame on you, but you can’t cross that line,” Homan said Wednesday, railing against the Democrats during an appearance on “Kudlow.”

“When you cross a line of impediment, when you cross the line of knowingly harboring and concealing an illegal alien, when you criminally trespass one of our facilities, we will ask the attorney general to prosecute you.”

“You can’t cross that line of impediment,” he continued.

Homan previously responded “yes” when asked by a reporter if the lawmakers implicated in the situation should face censure or removal of their committee assignments. 

He also told Kudlow he had been in touch with Trump counselor Alina Habba, the acting U.S. attorney for the district of New Jersey, regarding the matter.

“Alina’s taking it seriously, going through a lot of videotape, talking to a lot of witnesses, and we’ll see where the investigation falls,” Homan shared.

He proceeded to blast the lawmakers as “very inappropriate” and “unprofessional,” stressing the need to control a facility containing “dangerous” illegal immigrant criminals for the safety of all parties – the detainees, officers and the public.

“Squad” Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) recently offered a specific warning to DHS officials, including Homan and Sec. Kristi Noem, regarding Democratic officials entangled in the news.

“You lay a finger on [New Jersey Congresswoman] Bonnie Watson Coleman or any of the representatives that were there – you lay a finger on them, and we’re going to have a problem,” Ocasio-Cortez said on Instagram.

Homan dismissed the rhetoric, saying the New York Democrat “doesn’t know what she’s talking about” and that he has much more knowledge and experience in the border security realm than she does.

House Republicans have introduced measures to punish the Democrats involved in the altercation, including a censure resolution against Rep. LaMonica McIver, another lawmaker from New Jersey who was at the protest, and a resolution to strip them of their committee assignments.

On Tuesday, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) warned against repercussions for his fellow Democrat lawmakers who clashed with federal agents at an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) detention facility at Delaney Hall in Newark, New Jersey, last week.

During an exchange with Fox News reporter Chad Pergram, Jeffries repeatedly said “they’ll find out” when pressed what might happen if the House Democrats involved in the incident were to be arrested by federal authorities or get sanctioned.

Trump Administration Suffers Major Court Defeat In Sanctuary Cities Fight

4

The Trump administration suffered a significant legal setback on Wednesday after a federal judge dismissed the Department of Justice’s lawsuit challenging “sanctuary” immigration policies in four New Jersey cities, ruling the federal government lacks standing to bring the case.

U.S. District Judge Evelyn Padin threw out the DOJ’s lawsuit against Newark, Jersey City, Paterson, and Hoboken, concluding that even if the administration prevailed, New Jersey’s statewide immigration restrictions would remain in effect, meaning the court could not provide the relief the federal government was seeking. The case was dismissed without prejudice, leaving open the possibility that the DOJ could refile if it establishes standing.

The Justice Department filed the lawsuit in May 2025, arguing that the four cities’ policies unlawfully obstruct federal immigration enforcement and violate the Constitution’s Supremacy Clause.

The complaint described the municipal policies as “a frontal assault on the federal immigration laws and the federal authorities that administer them,” arguing they prevent willing local law enforcement agencies from assisting Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

According to Politico, Padin said the administration’s argument ignored a critical legal reality.

“The Federal Government’s case has a fundamental flaw—it treats the Challenged Policies as though they operate in isolation. They do not,” Padin wrote.

The judge noted that New Jersey’s statewide Immigrant Trust Directive independently limits how state and local law enforcement cooperate with federal civil immigration authorities. Because that directive would remain in force regardless of what happened to the four cities’ individual policies, striking down the local ordinances would not remedy the federal government’s alleged injury.

The Immigrant Trust Directive, originally issued in 2018 under then-Gov. Phil Murphy’s administration, was codified into state law earlier this year by Gov. Mikie Sherrill. It sharply limits voluntary cooperation between local police and federal immigration authorities except where required by law. The directive has already survived multiple legal challenges, including lawsuits brought by Republican-led counties that were rejected by both the U.S. District Court and the Third Circuit Court of Appeals.

The DOJ argued that portions of Newark’s, Jersey City’s, and Hoboken’s local policies went further than the statewide directive and therefore could be challenged independently. Padin disagreed, finding those differences either too minor or too speculative to justify continuing the case.

The ruling marks the latest courtroom setback for the Trump administration’s aggressive campaign against sanctuary jurisdictions. Earlier this week, another federal judge dismissed the DOJ’s lawsuit challenging Los Angeles’ sanctuary city ordinance, dealing another blow to the administration’s effort to compel greater local cooperation with federal immigration enforcement.

Neither President Donald Trump nor the White House has publicly commented on the ruling.

Trump Signals Support For Legal Protections For Longtime Migrant Workers

2
Donald Trump via Gage Skidmore Flickr

DES MOINES, Iowa — Speaking at the Iowa State Fairgrounds hours before Independence Day, President Donald Trump said he is drafting legislation to shield long-serving farm and hospitality workers from immigration enforcement actions.

“We’re working on legislation right now,” Trump told the crowd. “Farmers, look, they know better. They work with them for years.”

He referenced cases where immigrant workers had been employed for over a decade before being removed through federal action.

“You had cases… where people have worked for a farm for 14, 15 years, and they get thrown out pretty viciously. And we can’t do it,” Trump said.

The remarks appear to address the impact of immigration raids, such as those reported at California farms, where labor shortages have followed large-scale enforcement. A significant portion of that workforce is made up of illegal immigrants.

Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins, who was present on stage, had initially raised the issue.

After weeks of back-and-forth, Trump ultimately echoed her stance on Thursday night — arguing that those in agriculture and hospitality deserve more authority over who they employ. “We’re going to work with them, and we’re going to work very strong and smart,” he said. “We’re going to put you in charge. We’re going to make you responsible. And I think that’s going to make a lot of people happy.”

Acknowledging that the proposal may not sit well with his party’s immigration hardliners, Trump added: “radical right people, who I also happen to like a lot, they may not be quite as happy. But they’ll understand, won’t they?”

He then turned to Rollins and said, “Do you think they’ll understand that you’re the one that brought this whole situation up?”

The comments signal a more pragmatic tone on immigration from the president, who has long emphasized enforcement but now appears open to reforms aimed at stabilizing the labor force in key sectors.

ICE Leadership Shakeup Exposed Growing Fractures Within Homeland Security Department

6

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is undergoing a sweeping leadership shakeup within U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), as tensions rise over how aggressively the agency should pursue deportations.

According to four senior DHS officials, the changes affect ICE field offices in at least eight major cities, including Los Angeles, San Diego, Phoenix, Denver, Portland, Philadelphia, El Paso, and New Orleans. Many of those posts will now be filled by Border Patrol and Customs and Border Protection (CBP) officials — a move insiders describe as an unprecedented realignment of power within the department.

The overhaul underscores growing divisions within DHS over deportation priorities. One faction, led by Border Czar Tom Homan and ICE Director Todd Lyons, favors focusing enforcement on criminal aliens and those with final deportation orders. Another group — including DHS Secretary Kristi Noem, senior adviser Corey Lewandowski, and Border Patrol Commander Greg Bovino — has pushed for a broader, more assertive approach to immigration enforcement, arguing that all individuals in the country illegally should be subject to removal.

“ICE started off with the worst of the worst, knowing every target they are hitting, but since Border Patrol came to LA in June, we’ve lost our focus, going too hard, too fast, with limited prioritization,” one senior DHS official told Fox News. “It’s getting numbers, but at what cost?”

Another official put it more bluntly:

“ICE is arresting criminal aliens. They [Border Patrol] are hitting Home Depots and car washes.”

Border Patrol agents have defended the expanded strategy, saying it reflects the mandate voters expected from the Trump administration’s promise to restore border security and enforce immigration law.

“What did everyone think mass deportations meant? Only the worst?” one Border Patrol agent told Fox News. “Tom Homan has said it himself — anyone in the U.S. illegally is on the table.”

A DHS spokesperson, Tricia McLaughlin, said in a statement that while there are no formal announcements of personnel changes, “the Trump administration remains laser focused on delivering results and removing violent criminal illegal aliens from this country.”

Broader Context: Trump Administration’s Enforcement Push

The leadership reshuffle comes as deportation numbers remain below internal targets set earlier this year, according to DHS officials. The Trump administration has emphasized that its immigration enforcement policies are designed to uphold the rule of law and deter illegal border crossings — a key promise from the 2016 campaign that continues to resonate with many Republican voters.

Former President Donald Trump and his allies have long argued that consistent enforcement, rather than selective deportations, strengthens national security and discourages future unlawful entry. Many GOP leaders, including members of Congress and state governors, have defended the administration’s approach as necessary to restore deterrence and public safety after what they describe as years of lax border control.

Supporters point to prior surges in illegal crossings as evidence that limited enforcement under past administrations only encouraged more unlawful migration. They also note that under Trump, ICE was instructed to prioritize criminal offenders but retain authority to arrest any undocumented immigrant encountered during operations.

The shakeup — replacing ICE field chiefs with seasoned Border Patrol leaders — signals the administration’s intent to centralize authority and speed up deportations ahead of new immigration enforcement goals expected later this year.

“These moves are about accountability and results,” one DHS official said. “We’re not changing direction — we’re doubling down.”

Judge Rebuked Twice By Supreme Court Deals New Blow To Trump Immigration Agenda

A federal judge already twice rebuked by the Supreme Court is back at it—this time blocking the Trump administration from ending legal protections for thousands of Ethiopian migrants.

Judge Brian Murphy, a Biden appointee in Massachusetts, temporarily halted the administration’s plan to strip temporary protected status (TPS) from more than 5,000 Ethiopians—a move that would have made them deportable within 60 days.

Murphy said the Department of Homeland Security didn’t follow the law when it pulled the plug on the program.

That ruling lands right in the middle of the administration’s broader push to shrink TPS and tighten immigration enforcement.

But it also lands on a judge with a track record.

Murphy has repeatedly tried to block Trump-era deportation policies—especially efforts to send migrants to third countries. The Supreme Court has stepped in twice to reverse him, even issuing a rare 7–2 clarification saying he ignored its orders. An appeals court also shut down one of his more recent rulings just last month.

Critics say this is more of the same.

“This rogue judge lacks the subject matter jurisdiction to issue this order,” Sen. Eric Schmitt said. “The assault on the rule of law continues.”

Legal analyst Jonathan Turley piled on, warning that “this system cannot function with such rogue operators at the trial level.”

Iowa Solicitor General Eric Wessan pointed to what he sees as a fundamental problem: the law itself.

“One big problem for Murphy is the statute: It explains TPS determinations aren’t reviewable. Another is the Supreme Court, which has stopped similar orders twice,” Wessan said. “He finds neither statute nor SCOTUS stops him. I’m unconvinced.”

Murphy, for his part, insists he’s not defying the high court. He noted that the Supreme Court hasn’t fully explained its recent TPS-related rulings—and hasn’t stepped in on every similar case.

“There is no reason to assume” the justices have settled the issue, he wrote.

The lawsuit behind the ruling claims the administration’s TPS rollback isn’t just procedural—it’s discriminatory. Lawyers for the plaintiffs argue the policy is aimed at reducing non-white immigration, writing that the effort targets “the nationals of majority Black countries” in particular.

The Justice Department is expected to appeal, setting up yet another round in a growing legal fight between the Trump administration and a judge who keeps standing in its way.

Pro-Trump Mayor Accused Of Illegally Voting As A Noncitizen

4
Missvain, CC BY 4.0 via Wikimedia Commons

A small-town Kansas mayor who has supported President Donald Trump for years is now facing serious felony charges after state prosecutors allege he voted in multiple elections despite not being a U.S. citizen.

The New York Times this week highlighted the case of Joe Ceballos, the recently re-elected mayor of Coldwater, Kansas — a rural community of just 687 residents — who is now charged with multiple counts of voter fraud-related crimes.

Ceballos, 55, is facing three counts of election perjury and three counts of voting without being qualified under Kansas law. Prosecutors say he illegally cast ballots while holding permanent resident status rather than full citizenship.

“Nobody ever told me that I couldn’t vote or register to vote,” Ceballos told The Times. “And so, as a young man, yeah, I did it. I registered.”

A Case Raising Broader Questions About Election Integrity

The case arrives at a time when election security and voter eligibility remain central concerns for many Americans, particularly Republicans who argue that citizenship requirements must be enforced to protect the integrity of U.S. elections.

While instances of noncitizen voting are considered rare, conservatives have long maintained that even isolated cases undermine trust in the system — and that laws already on the books should be applied consistently.

Ceballos was born in Mexico and moved to the United States at age four, according to the report. He later obtained a green card in 1990. Ceballos said he believed that being a lawful permanent resident allowed him to vote.

“His defense, essentially, is that he did not understand that being a permanent resident should have precluded him from voting and holding office, and that no one ever told him he was not eligible,” the paper wrote.

Citizenship Application Triggered Investigation

Ceballos said his legal troubles began last year when he applied to become a U.S. citizen. During the process, he admitted to a federal official that he had previously voted.

“His eyes got real big, and I was like, ‘Boy, did I do something wrong?’” Ceballos recalled.

That admission reportedly halted his citizenship application and alerted Kansas officials, setting off the investigation that ultimately led to criminal charges.

If convicted, Ceballos could face up to 68 months in prison and a $200,000 fine.

“This alien committed a felony by voting in American elections,” DHS spokeswoman Tricia McLaughlin said about Ceballos.

Trump Supporter Says He Doesn’t Belong in “Criminal” Category

Ceballos acknowledged voting for Trump in 2016, 2020, and 2024, and said he still supports much of the president’s immigration agenda — particularly efforts to remove violent criminals from the country.

“I still strongly believe in Trump’s immigration laws about, ‘Let’s get the bad guys out of here,’” he said. “You know, they’re murderers, they killed people, they molested people, let’s get them out of here.

“But I feel like I don’t fit that category,” he added. “And I feel like that’s how they’re treating me.”

His comments reflect a broader debate within the immigration discussion: Republicans often emphasize the difference between legal immigrants who follow the process and those who break the law — while also insisting that voting is a right reserved only for American citizens.

Small Town Residents Rally Around Mayor

Coldwater residents told The Times they view the prosecution as a “personal attack on a pillar of the town.” Ceballos was overwhelmingly re-elected last year by a margin of 101 votes to 20.

Supporters argue the case is a tragic example of confusion over complex immigration and election laws, while critics say citizenship rules are clear and must be upheld regardless of intent.

SAVE Act and Growing Push for Proof of Citizenship

The case comes as Trump has backed the SAVE Act, legislation that would require proof of U.S. citizenship to vote in federal elections — a measure Republicans argue is common sense and necessary to restore confidence in elections.

Democrats such as Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) have criticized the proposal, calling it discriminatory, but polling consistently shows strong public support for voter identification requirements.

CNN data analyst Harry Enten noted that surveys dating back to 2018 show at least 75% of Americans support voter ID laws, including a 2024 figure showing 83% approval.

“Normally, you might expect… a big divide by party,” Enten said. “But not really here.”

Sen. Susan Collins recently became the 50th lawmaker to signal support for the bill.

In an exclusive comment to The Maine Wire, Sen. Collins said she supports the current version of the SAVE Act.

Collins said she will support the version of the SAVE Act that has now cleared the House, calling it a “simple reform” aimed at strengthening confidence in federal elections.

“The law is clear that in this country only American citizens are eligible to vote in federal elections. In addition, having people provide an ID at the polls, just as they have to do before boarding an airplane, checking into a hotel, or buying an alcoholic beverage, is a simple reform that will improve the security of our federal elections and will help give people more confidence in the results,” she said.

Collins said that her support hinges on changes made to the legislation. She said she previously opposed an earlier draft that would have required voters to prove their citizenship each time they cast a ballot.

“Requiring voters to produce passports or birth certificates on election day — as opposed to just a state-issued ID — would have placed an unnecessary burden on the voters. That provision is no longer in the bill and dropping this requirement was key to getting my support.”

Trump Taps New ICE Director

President Donald Trump gestures to the crowd after delivering remarks at the House GOP Member Retreat, Tuesday, January 6, 2026, at the Donald J. Trump- John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts in Washington, D.C. (Official White House Photo by Daniel Torok)

President Donald Trump announced Saturday that he is nominating longtime Oklahoma law enforcement officer and Marine veteran Lance Schroyer to serve as the next director of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), placing another ally with deep state and local law enforcement experience at the center of his administration’s immigration agenda.

In a post on Truth Social, Trump praised Schroyer’s nearly three decades in law enforcement and described him as a leader prepared to carry out the administration’s aggressive deportation strategy.

“Lance has over 29 YEARS of Law Enforcement experience in Oklahoma,” Trump wrote. “He is a PATRIOT with real operational experience, and proven leader with DECADES of experience locking up the worst of the worst.”

The president also highlighted Schroyer’s background as a former Oklahoma state trooper and U.S. Marine, adding that he has “firsthand experience getting Illegal Aliens OFF our streets.”

Trump urged the Senate to act quickly on the nomination.

“The Senate must confirm Lance Schroyer IMMEDIATELY. Do not delay,” the president wrote. “Together, we will MAKE AMERICA SAFE AGAIN.”

If confirmed, Schroyer would become the first Senate-confirmed ICE director in nearly a decade. The agency has operated under a series of acting leaders since 2017, reflecting years of political battles over immigration enforcement and the role of the agency.

Schroyer most recently worked with the Department of Homeland Security on expanding ICE’s 287(g) program, which allows state and local law enforcement agencies to partner with the federal government on immigration enforcement. Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin said Schroyer comes “straight from the operational field,” where he led large-scale enforcement operations alongside state and federal agencies.

Mullin quickly endorsed Trump’s selection.

“President Trump made a great pick, and I’m confident Lance’s strong leadership and firsthand experience will empower the men and women of ICE to deport criminal illegal aliens, secure the homeland, and protect the American people,” Mullin wrote on X.

“It has been 11 years since @DHSgov has had a Senate confirmed @ICEgov Director. The Senate must quickly confirm Lance Schroyer.”

Schroyer would replace acting leadership that has overseen ICE during one of the agency’s busiest periods in recent history. David Venturella has served as acting director since Todd Lyons stepped down earlier this year.

The nomination comes as immigration remains one of Trump’s signature issues. The administration has made mass deportations, expanded ICE partnerships with local law enforcement and increased daily immigration arrests central pillars of its second-term agenda. Trump claimed Saturday that his administration has achieved the highest daily arrest rates by ICE and Customs and Border Protection of any presidency.

DOJ To Investigate Officials Who Obstruct Immigration Enforcement

10
Illegal Immigration in the United State via Wikimedia Commons

The Justice Department wants federal prosecutors across the country to investigate state or local officials who obstruct immigration enforcement under President Donald Trump’s new administration

According to a new memo shared by the Trump Administration, Acting Deputy Attorney General Emil Bove, Trump’s former defense attorney, outlines “interim decisions and policy changes” pending the confirmation of Trump’s nominee for U.S. Attorney General, Pam Bondi. He said interim changes are necessary as an initial response to Trump’s executive orders regarding “three of the most serious threats facing the American people.” 

Those threats, Bove wrote, are cartels and other transnational criminal organizations, such as Tren de Aragua (TdA) and La Mara Salvatrucha (MS-13), which “are a scourge on society resulting in an unstable and unsafe border and huge flows of illegal immigration in violation of U.S. law.” The memo said the second threat is how “brutal and intolerable violent crime by members of these organizations and illegal aliens is escalating rapidly across the country.” The third threat defined by Bove is how the “fentanyl crisis and opioid epidemic are poisoning our communities and have inflicted an unprecedented toll of addiction, suffering, and death.” 

“The Justice Department must, and will, work to eradicate these threats,” Bove wrote. “Indeed, it is the responsibility of the Justice Department to defend the Constitution and, accordingly, to lawfully execute the policies that the American people elected President Trump to implement. The Justice Department’s responsibility, proudly shouldered by each of its employees, includes aggressive enforcement of laws enacted by Congress, as well as vigorous defense of the President’s actions on behalf of the United States against legal challenges. The Department’s personnel must come together in the offices that taxpayers have funded to do this vitally important work.” 

The memo states that the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution and other authorities “require state and local actors to comply with the Executive Branch’s immigration enforcement activities.” 

Bove reiterated how “federal law prohibits state and local actors from resisting, obstructing, and otherwise failing to comply with lawful immigration-related commands and requests, pursuant to, for example, the President’s extensive Article II authority with respect to foreign affairs and national security, the Immigration and Nationality Act, and the Alien Enemies Act.” 

Bove said U.S. Attorneys Offices “and litigating components of the Department of Justice shall investigate incidents involving any such misconduct for potential prosecution, including for obstructing federal functions” in violation of federal statutes.

The Chicago Police Department is refusing to assist with upcoming deportations by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) across the Windy City.

Chicago officials took a vow of their own to not comply after Trump laid out plans to tackle issues surrounding illegal immigration and the U.S. border.

Chicago police said the municipal code includes legislation that prevents them from assisting federal immigration authorities with enforcement based on immigration status. The department also noted it does not document immigration status, nor does it share the immigration status of individuals with federal authorities.

City ordinance requires a supervisor to respond to the scene if an immigration agency requests assistance with a civil immigration enforcement operation.

“To be clear, the Chicago Police Department will not assist or intervene in civil immigration enforcement in accordance with the City of Chicago Municipal Code,” the police department’s statement read. “As always, we will continue to enforce the law if a crime occurs, regardless of the citizenship status of those involved.”

Report: Appeals Court Blocks Trump Admin’s Deportation Flights

4
Image via Pixabay

A federal appellate court declined to issue a stay on a lower court’s orders in a suit challenging the Trump administration‘s authority to deport Venezuelan nationals via a 1798 wartime law. 

In a 2-1 decision Wednesday, a three-judge panel sided with the plaintiffs in the suit, further blocking the Trump administration’s ability to move forward with its deportation agenda. 

Judges Karen Henderson, Patricia Millett, and Justin Walker of the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals presided over Monday’s oral arguments, which they agreed to hear last week on an expedited basis. 

In a concurring opinion of the ruling, Henderson, a Bush appointee, said: “At this early stage, the government has yet to show a likelihood of success on the merits. The equities favor the plaintiffs. And the district court entered the TROs for a quintessentially valid purpose: to protect its remedial authority long enough to consider the parties’ arguments.

“Accordingly, and for the foregoing reasons, the request to stay the district court’s TROs should be denied.”

Their decision could ultimately be kicked to the Supreme Court for further review.  

This is a breaking news story. Please check back for updates.