Supreme Court leaves ban on immigration judges' case pauses in place

The Supreme Court on Tuesday declined to restore immigration judges' ability to temporarily set aside deportation cases, a tool known as administrative closure, Reuters reported.

The court's one-sentence order gave no explanation, and no justice publicly dissented. It leaves in place a nationwide judgment blocking a 2024 Biden administration rule that allowed the practice while the litigation continues.

How the case got here

Texas sued over the rule on June 22. The Trump administration agreed the same day that the rule was unlawful, and U.S. District Judge Reed O'Connor in Wichita Falls approved the agreement and blocked the rule nationwide, according to Reuters.

O'Connor later refused to let the cities of Baltimore, New Haven, Conn., and Columbus, Ohio, along with the legal services group Centro Legal de la Raza, join the case. The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals declined to pause the judgment.

The arguments

The challengers, represented by Democracy Forward, called the Texas suit "manufactured litigation" and said the deal sidestepped federal rulemaking law, Reuters reported. They told the court the policy helped crime victims and neglected juveniles, according to Newsweek.

The Justice Department urged the justices to reject the request, arguing that the cities lacked standing and had not shown immediate harm, Newsweek reported. Texas and the administration argue that administrative closure works like an amnesty for people without legal status.

Immigration judges have used administrative closure in hundreds of thousands of deportation cases over the years, according to Reuters.