Here's Why it Sometimes *Looks* Like the Administration isn't Following Court Orders When They Actually Are: Stays Explained

There are some people out there who still insist that this administration just ignores court orders, and that's simply not true. They *are* following court orders in the overwhelming majority of cases, and even in the handful where they appear to be ignoring court orders, they are hanging their "ignoring" of the court orders based on how they construe those court orders, or in some cases they claim that they are trying to comply but are having difficulty doing so (in which case they are producing documents to the Court to demonstrate their claim).

Even in the now notorious "planes in the air" case, where the Court ordered the planes turned around, the administration argued that by the time they received the order the planes were no longer in U.S. airspace, and so were no longer under the jurisdiction of the Court.

The point is, they don't generally just silently ignore court orders, or even openly defy court orders.

By far the most common cause of the misunderstanding - of people thinking that the administration is just ignoring court orders - is when a court issues an injunction (which is reported in the news) and then the administration *appeals* the injunction, and a "stay" is granted (which is often *not* reported in the news).

A stay is basically a court hitting the 'pause' button on the injunction. It is a procedural mechanism which allows the otherwise-enjoined party to continue doing what the injunction prohibits (or to not do what the injunction requires) while the case is still going on in the lower court.

Again, it is a procedural action, it is *not* a decision on the merits of the case, although it *can* tell you how the court granting the stay thinks the case may go. In fact, it must predict that. Here are the factors that an appellate court must consider when deciding whether to grant a stay:

(1) whether the stay applicant has made a strong showing that they are likely to succeed on the merits;
(2) whether the applicant would be irreparably injured absent a stay;
(3) whether issuance of the stay would substantially injure the other parties interested in the proceeding; and
(4) where the public interest lies.

Sometimes the same court that issues the injunction will then immediately *stay its own injunction* pending appeal, because the administration has said they are going to appeal it and requests that the injunction be stayed by the Court that issued the injunction while it is being appealed.

Of course I am simplifying for a general audience what can be a very complex area of procedure, but *generally*, for the purpose of the average person reading the news or headlines on social media, when you hear someone say "What does it matter, they will just ignore the court order anyways", well, that's just plain wrong.

*My reporting is reader-supported. If you're not a Notes from the Front member yet, please consider joining me and supporting my reporting (and my coffee habit). It's just $5 a month, it's easy to cancel, and you will truly be supporting what I do here. Plus as a member you get all of the documents that I include with every post! You can join here now: