Study aid, not legal advice. caselaw is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice or engage in the unauthorized practice of law (UPL). All briefs, outlines, and citation tools on these pages are educational summaries for law students; they are not a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney admitted in your jurisdiction. Bar-admission rules vary by state. For court filings or client matters, verify every authority against the official reporter and your court's local rules. Use of caselaw does not create an attorney-client relationship.
Donald J. TRUMP, President of the United States, et al., petitioners, v. INTERNATIONAL REFUGEE ASSISTANCE, et al., 2017 — 138 S. Ct. 353 · caselaw · US
General
Donald J. TRUMP, President of the United States, et al., petitioners, v. INTERNATIONAL REFUGEE ASSISTANCE, et al.
138 S. Ct. 353199 L. Ed. 2d 203·Supreme Court of the United States·2017
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
Donald J. TRUMP, President of the United States, et al., petitioners,
v.
INTERNATIONAL REFUGEE ASSISTANCE, et al.
No. 16-1436.
Supreme Court of the United States
Oct. 10, 2017.
We granted certiorari in this case to resolve a challenge to "the temporary suspension of entry of aliens abroad under Section 2(c) of Executive Order No. 13,780 ." Because that provision of the Order "expired by its own terms" on September 24, 2017, the appeal no longer presents a "live case or controversy." Burke v. Barnes, 479 U.S. 361, 363, 107 S.Ct. 734, 93 L.Ed.2d 732 (1987). Following our established practice in such cases, the judgment is therefore vacated, and the case is remanded to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit with instructions to dismiss as moot the challenge to Executive Order No. 13,780 . United States v. Munsingwear, Inc., 340 U.S. 36, 39, 71 S.Ct. 104, 95 L.Ed. 36 (1950). We express no view on the merits.
Justice SOTOMAYOR dissents from the order vacating the judgment below And would dismiss the writ of certiorari as improvidently granted.