menu_open Columnists
We use cookies to provide some features and experiences in QOSHE

More information  .  Close

Because KBJ Denied Administrative Stay in Third-Country Removal Case, The Application Should Be Referred To The Full Court Now

2 0
previous day

The Volokh Conspiracy

Mostly law professors | Sometimes contrarian | Often libertarian | Always independent

About The Volokh Conspiracy Editorial Independence Who we are Books Volokh Daily Email Archives Search DMCA RSS

Because KBJ Denied Administrative Stay in Third-Country Removal Case, The Application Should Be Referred To The Full Court Now

Justice Jackson gave the respondents a leisurely four days to respond.

Josh Blackman | 9.24.2026 8:24 PM

I may have to eat crow on the lightning docket (no order in the Missouri case), but things are brewing with the third-country removal case. The Solicitor General's emergency application in United States v. D.V.D. lays out the issue neatly:

This is the third time the government has been forced to seek emergency relief from the district court's orders in this case about "third-country removals"—an essential tool to remove certain aliens, including some of the worst criminal aliens. This Court granted relief on both previous occasions. The latest order rests on the same fundamentally flawed legal premises as the previous rulings, and the nominal new grounds that the lower courts added to try to buttress those prior decisions are even weaker than those that failed to sustain the originals. Meanwhile, the equities that supported this Court's intervention (twice) have, if anything, only grown stronger in favor of the government's continued enforcement of the challenged policy. A stay is thus once again warranted. Cf. Trump v.........

© Reason.com