Emergency application
Notice before third-country deportations
Department of Homeland Security v. D.V.D.
What did the Court do?
The Court granted the request on June 23, 2025: the lower court's ruling is on hold while the appeal continues.
Emergency rulings are temporary and do not decide the underlying case. Justice Sotomayor, Justice Kagan, and Justice Jackson would have ruled the other way.
What's being asked
The federal government asks the Supreme Court to pause an April 18 preliminary injunction, a temporary court order, from a Massachusetts federal court. The dissent describes the dispute as involving federal officials’ third-country removals: sending noncitizens to countries other than their own. The government says the district court lacked authority to hear the case and that the four people’s claims to fair process have no merit.
What the Court did
The Court put the April 18 injunction on hold (stayed it), granting (approving) the federal government’s request for emergency help. The pause lasts while the First Circuit appeal continues and, if a party timely asks for Supreme Court review, until that review ends. It does not decide who wins the main dispute. Justices Sotomayor, Kagan, and Jackson dissented (disagreed with the result); the Court did not publish the other justices’ votes.
- Dissented
- Wrote separately
- Vote not published
- Dissenting · 3recorded against the Court's order
What it means
This is a temporary pause, not a final decision about who wins the underlying dispute. The First Circuit appeal continues. The docket lists no related case on the main legal question, and the Court set no argument date for this application.
Separate writings
- Read (PDF)
Justice Sotomayor, joined by Justice Kagan and Justice Jackson, dissenting
Sources
Facts on this page come from the Supreme Court docket, orders, and opinions for No. 24A1153. The answers restate that record in plain words; explainer copy is written from the record and the filings only.