Fritz Emmanuel Lesly Miot v. Donald J. Trump

No. 26-5050 (D.C. Cir. Mar. 6, 2026) · United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit · March 6, 2026 · No. 26-5050

Summary

The United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit denied the government’s emergency motion for a stay pending appeal in litigation challenging the termination of Haiti’s Temporary Protected Status designation. The per curiam majority held that the government had not demonstrated sufficient irreparable harm and that the balance of equities favored Haitian TPS holders, who faced risks including detention, deportation, family separation, and loss of work authorization. Judge Walker dissented, concluding that the government was likely to prevail under the TPS statute and that the equities supported a stay.

Court
United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
Writing for the Court
Per curiam; Walker; Pan; Garcia
Jurisdiction
United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
Decision date
March 6, 2026
Docket number
26-5050
Procedural posture
The government appealed the district court's order postponing termination of Haiti's Temporary Protected Status designation and sought an emergency stay of that order pending appeal.
Standard of review
A stay pending appeal requires a strong showing of likely success on the merits, irreparable injury absent a stay, lack of substantial injury to other interested parties, and consistency with the public interest. The court focused on irreparable harm and the balance of equities.
Precedential value
Published opinion; the per curiam order's denial of a stay is precedential to the extent it states the applicable stay standard and evaluates irreparable harm and the equities. The discussion of TPS jurisdiction and merits likelihood was not necessary to the disposition.
Parties
Donald J. Trump, President of the United States of America, et al. v. Fritz Emmanuel Lesly Miot, et al.
Disposition
writ_denied

Topics

temporary protected statusimmigrationappellate procedureequitable reliefjudicial review of agency action

Practice areas

immigrationadministrative lawappellate procedureequitable relief

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the government satisfied the requirements for a stay pending appeal of the district court's postponement of the termination of Haiti's TPS designation.
  2. Whether the government demonstrated irreparable harm from maintaining the status quo while the appeal proceeded.
  3. Whether the balance of equities and the public interest favored staying the district court's order.
  4. Whether the Supreme Court's unexplained stays in National TPS Alliance v. Noem required a stay in this materially different case.
  5. Whether the TPS statute's judicial-review bar necessarily precluded plaintiffs' process-based challenge to the termination decision.

Holdings

  1. The government failed to demonstrate an injury that was certain, great, and sufficiently imminent to constitute irreparable harm. Generalized assertions that the district court's order intruded on executive authority were insufficient.
  2. The balance of equities decisively favored the plaintiffs and did not justify a stay pending appeal.
  3. The Supreme Court's unexplained stays in National TPS Alliance informed the court's equitable analysis but did not require a stay because the government had shown materially different circumstances in this case.
  4. The court did not resolve the merits or jurisdictional question, but stated that the TPS statute's judicial-review bar does not necessarily preclude process-based challenges to the manner in which a TPS determination is reached, as opposed to direct challenges to the determination itself.

Key quotations

The government must demonstrate an injury that is “both certain and great,” and “of such imminence that there is a clear and present need for equitable relief to prevent irreparable harm.” (3)
The government’s failure to meet its burden of demonstrating irreparable harm alone justifies denying emergency relief that would upend the status quo and increase uncertainty while this appeal proceeds. (4)
Absent clearer guidance from the Court, we decline to read it as having endorsed such a broad and seemingly novel proposition. (5)

Factual background

Plaintiffs are Haitian nationals holding Temporary Protected Status under 8 U.S.C. § 1254a. Haiti had been designated for TPS since 2010, allowing eligible Haitian nationals to remain in the United States and work lawfully. On November 28, 2025, the Department of Homeland Security published a notice terminating Haiti's TPS designation. The district court postponed the termination, and the government sought a stay pending appeal.

Procedural history

Plaintiffs, Haitian nationals holding TPS, challenged the Department of Homeland Security's termination of Haiti's TPS designation. The United States District Court for the District of Columbia postponed the termination under 5 U.S.C. § 705, finding the termination arbitrary and capricious, contrary to the TPS statute, and violative of the Fifth Amendment's equal protection guarantee. The government moved in the D.C. Circuit for a stay pending appeal, which the court denied.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…