The Supreme Court on September 29 granted an emergency stay of a Boston District Court order that had blocked third-country removals, acting just 40 minutes after the government filed its reply brief. The Court treated the stay application as a petition for certiorari, granted that petition, and set the case for argument in December. The order also directed the parties to brief several specific questions, including whether the district court had jurisdiction and whether it could issue classwide declaratory relief or vacatur under 8 U.S.C. §1252(f)(1).
Notably, the Court requested briefing on a fourth question—"such other questions that the Government determines are appropriate for the proper disposition of the case"—a formulation the source says is unprecedented in similar stay-and-cert cases. The expedited timeline and the detailed questions suggest the Court is aiming for a definitive resolution, though the unusual catch-all may give the government latitude to raise additional issues. Justices Sotomayor, Kagan, and Jackson would have denied the stay, indicating a sharp divide on the merits.
The source notes that the Court did not wait for Justice Jackson to formally refer the case, and that the stay will terminate when the Court issues its judgment. The order mirrors rare procedural moves seen in a few prior cases, but the open-ended fourth question stands out. The case now moves to briefing and argument, with the underlying legality of third-country removals under federal immigration law and treaty obligations at stake.