Summary
The Ninth Circuit denied the Government’s motion to vacate its prior published opinion affirming preliminary relief concerning the vacatur and termination of Venezuela’s Temporary Protected Status and partial vacatur of Haiti’s TPS. The court held that, even assuming the appeal became moot after the district court entered partial summary judgment, post-decisional vacatur was discretionary and unwarranted because the precedent remained valuable, the Government was not sufficiently prejudiced, and the circumstances did not require vacatur.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the district court's subsequent entry of partial summary judgment and set-aside relief mooted the previously decided appeal.
- Whether the Ninth Circuit should vacate its published decision under Munsingwear because any mootness arose after the appellate decision was issued.
- Whether the absence of an issued mandate when potential mootness arose required vacatur.
Holdings
- Even assuming that the district court's later partial summary judgment and set-aside relief rendered the earlier appeal moot, Munsingwear did not compel vacatur because mootness arose after the Ninth Circuit issued its decision and vacatur in those circumstances is discretionary and extraordinary.
- The fact that the mandate had not issued when potential mootness arose was not dispositive; the relevant question is whether mootness arose before or after the appellate decision was issued.
Key quotations
“We hold that the circumstances of this case are distinguishable from those in Munsingwear, and Munsingwear therefore does not compel vacatur.” (4)
“Judicial precedents are presumptively correct and valuable to the legal community as a whole.” (5)
“Vacatur due to post-decisional mootness is the rare exception, not the rule.” (8)
“The Government’s Motion to Vacate our opinion in NTPSA I is DENIED.” (8)
Factual background
The Government challenged a district-court order postponing the effect of Secretary Noem's vacatur and termination of Venezuela's TPS and partial vacatur of Haiti's TPS. The Ninth Circuit affirmed the postponement order in NTPSA I. One week later, the district court entered partial summary judgment for the plaintiffs and set aside the challenged agency actions, which the Government argued mooted the earlier appeal.
Procedural history
The district court initially entered a postponement order under 5 U.S.C. § 705 concerning the Secretary of Homeland Security's vacatur and termination of Venezuela's Temporary Protected Status and partial vacatur of Haiti's TPS. The Ninth Circuit affirmed that order in NTPSA I on August 29, 2025. Afterward, the district court entered partial summary judgment for the plaintiffs and set aside the challenged agency actions; the Ninth Circuit later affirmed that judgment in NTPSA III. The Government then sought vacatur of NTPSA I based on alleged post-decisional mootness.