McNary v. Haitian Centers Council, Inc.
Headline: Court grants Government a temporary stay, pausing lower courts’ orders and keeping forced returns to foreign waters on hold while a petition for review is filed and considered.
Holding: The Court granted a temporary stay of the Second Circuit and district court judgments, pausing forced returns while a certiorari petition may be filed and decided.
- Pauses forced returns to foreign waters while Supreme Court review is sought.
- Gives the Government temporary ability to block lower-court orders from taking effect.
- If the Supreme Court denies review, the pause ends automatically.
Summary
Background
The Government asked the Court to pause a Second Circuit judgment and a district court order that could lead to the forced return of certain plaintiffs to foreign waters. Justice Thomas referred the application to the full Court and the Court granted a stay while the Solicitor General may file a petition for review by August 24, 1992; if the petition is filed, the stay continues while the Court decides the petition and respondents’ response is due September 8, 1992.
Reasoning
The immediate question was whether to halt the lower courts’ rulings while the Supreme Court considers review. The Court ordered a stay of the judgments pending the filing and disposition of a petition for writ of certiorari, provided conditions are met. The order explains when the stay ends: it terminates automatically if the petition is denied and continues if the petition is granted until the Court’s judgment is sent down.
Real world impact
The stay temporarily prevents the lower-court orders from taking effect, which in practice pauses any forced returns to foreign waters for the people involved. The pause is conditional and not a final decision on the underlying legal question, so the situation could change depending on whether the Court accepts the case and how it rules.
Dissents or concurrances
Justice Blackmun, joined by Justice Stevens, dissented, arguing the Government failed to show it was likely to win on the merits and that the balance of equities did not favor a stay, noting plaintiffs face risks of persecution or worse if returned.
Opinions in this case:
Ask about this case
Ask questions about the entire case, including all opinions (majority, concurrences, dissents).
What was the Court's main decision and reasoning?
How did the dissenting opinions differ from the majority?
What are the practical implications of this ruling?