Top Headlines

Feeds

Supreme Court Keeps Immigration Judges’ Free‑Speech Lawsuit Alive, Halting Administration Stay

Updated (4 articles)

Supreme Court Refuses to Freeze Lawsuit On Dec. 19, 2025, the Court issued a brief order denying the Justice Department’s request for a stay, allowing the immigration‑judges lawsuit to proceed in federal court. The order stated the government had not demonstrated irreparable harm, so the case remains alive [1][2]. This move follows a series of emergency‑docket victories for the administration but stops the immediate dismissal of the claim.

Case Centers on Judges’ First‑Amendment Rights The suit, filed by a labor union representing immigration judges, challenges a policy that bars judges from making public statements about immigration matters. Judges, as Justice Department employees, argue the restriction is an unconstitutional prior restraint on speech [1][2]. The policy originated under the Trump administration and was later altered by the Biden administration.

Lower Courts Directed to Proceed Cautiously The justices signaled that district courts should continue the case without granting a stay, but must handle it carefully given broader implications for presidential removal authority. They hinted the case could affect the scope of the president’s power to fire independent‑agency officials, a question tied to a 90‑year‑old precedent [1]. This guidance aligns with the Court’s recent rulings on agency officials’ removals.

Potential Impact on Federal Employment Litigation By allowing the suit to move forward, the Court keeps open the question of whether immigration judges must use the federal‑employee grievance system or can sue directly in federal court. The outcome may set precedent for other federal workers challenging speech‑restriction policies [1][2]. The decision reflects the Court’s willingness to let substantive First‑Amendment challenges proceed despite the administration’s push for swift dismissal.

Sources

Timeline

Sep 2017 – The Executive Office for Immigration Review formalizes a policy that obliges immigration judges to obtain supervisory and ethics approval before delivering written work or public speeches, a rule the National Association of Immigration Judges later claims violates the First Amendment [3].

2020 – The National Association of Immigration Judges, represented by a former labor union, files a federal lawsuit challenging the speech‑approval policy as an unconstitutional prior restraint on judges’ free‑speech rights [4].

May 2025 – The Supreme Court permits President Trump to temporarily remove officials at the Merit Systems Protection Board and the National Labor Relations Board, a precedent that could broaden presidential removal power in the immigration judges case [1][2].

June 2025 – The Fourth Circuit revives the immigration judges’ lawsuit and remands it to the district court for fact‑finding on whether civil‑service laws function properly, setting the stage for the Supreme Court’s emergency actions [3].

Dec 5, 2025 – The Supreme Court schedules oral arguments for the case concerning presidential removal authority and its impact on the immigration judges’ free‑speech lawsuit [2].

Dec 5, 2025 – The Justice Department files an emergency motion asking the Court to block a lower‑court ruling that would allow immigration judges to pursue First Amendment claims in federal court [2].

Dec 5, 2025 – Chief Justice John Roberts issues a temporary stay halting the Fourth Circuit’s decision that would enforce the speech‑approval policy, keeping the policy in place while the lawsuit proceeds [3].

Dec 5, 2025 – Solicitor General D. John Sauer files an emergency request on behalf of EOIR acting director Daren Margolin to maintain the policy during litigation [3].

Dec 5, 2025 – The Court sets a deadline of 4 p.m. ET on Dec 10, 2025, for parties to file responses to the stay application, after which the stay will lapse if no further action occurs [3].

Dec 5, 2025 – First‑Amendment advocate Ramya Krishnan of the Knight Institute argues the stay lacks a compelling reason and that immigration judges should be allowed to raise their speech claims promptly in federal court [3].

Dec 19, 2025 – The Supreme Court revives the immigration judges’ lawsuit, finding the government has not shown irreparable harm and allowing the case to continue in federal court without granting the DOJ’s request for a stay [1].

Dec 19, 2025 – In a brief order, the Court backs the judges for now, rejecting the DOJ’s attempt to freeze the ruling and signaling lower courts should proceed cautiously as the case could reshape presidential removal authority and federal‑employee litigation pathways [4].

Late 2025 – 2026 (future) – The district court may restart proceedings, and the parties reserve the right to seek an emergency appeal if discovery begins before the case resolves, potentially extending the litigation into 2026 [1].

All related articles (4 articles)

External resources (2 links)