← All Cases Coverage by Bryan K. Randolph · BrynoDC

Pacito et al v. Trump, et al. (Refugee freeze, 9th Cir. 25-1313)

No. 25-1313 Circuit · Active Active
Court
9th Cir.
ca9
Argued
Sep 3, 2025
Filed
Mar 3, 2025
Filed (CL)
Mar 3, 2025
CL Status
active

Case Overview

The government appealed Judge Whitehead's preliminary injunction requiring the Trump administration to restore refugee processing.


The Application

History

Judge Whitehead found that plaintiffs demonstrated sufficient likelihood of success on what appear to be constitutional claims, that refugees face irreparable harm from processing delays, and that the balance of equities and public interest favor resuming refugee admissions. The Ninth Circuit must determine whether this determination was an abuse of discretion.

The Conclusion

The preliminary injunction remains in effect pending appellate resolution; the Ninth Circuit has not yet decided the merits of the government's appeal.

Federal Court TMR-0a32b187 Refugee Resettlement Pause <br> Appeal of 2:25-cv-00255 May 18, 2026

Case Analysis

Overview

The government appealed Judge Whitehead's preliminary injunction requiring the Trump administration to restore refugee processing.

Overview

The government appealed Judge Whitehead's preliminary injunction requiring the Trump administration to restore refugee processing.

Issue

Whether the Trump administration's refugee resettlement pause violates constitutional or statutory protections, and whether the district court properly issued a preliminary injunction requiring restoration of refugee processing.

Rule

A preliminary injunction is appropriate when the moving party demonstrates: (1) likelihood of success on the merits, (2) irreparable harm absent injunctive relief, (3) the balance of equities favors the injunction, and (4) the injunction serves the public interest. An appellate court reviews the district court's preliminary injunction order for abuse of discretion.

Analysis

Judge Whitehead found that plaintiffs demonstrated sufficient likelihood of success on what appear to be constitutional claims, that refugees face irreparable harm from processing delays, and that the balance of equities and public interest favor resuming refugee admissions. The Ninth Circuit must determine whether this determination was an abuse of discretion.

Conclusion

The preliminary injunction remains in effect pending appellate resolution; the Ninth Circuit has not yet decided the merits of the government's appeal.

Subscribe on Substack ↗

This tracker is maintained by BrynoDC and is free because readers fund it. Support