Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/18pdf/19a230_k53l.pdf
Page Number: 3

Cite as:  588 U. S. ____ (2019) 

3 

SOTOMAYOR, J., dissenting 

Second,  the  District  Court  found  that  the  challengers
would likely prevail because the Government skirted typi-
cal rulemaking procedures.  Id., at 947–951.  The District 
Court noted “serious questions” about the rule’s validity be-
cause the Government effected a sea change in immigration
law without first providing advance notice and opportunity
for  public  comment.  Id.,  at  930;  see  also  5  U. S. C.  §553.
The District Court found the Government’s purported jus-
tifications  unpersuasive  at  the  preliminary-injunction 
stage.  385  F. Supp.  3d,  at  948–951  (discussing  statutory 
exceptions to notice-and-comment procedures). 

Last, the District Court found the explanation for the rule
so poorly reasoned that the Government’s action was likely
arbitrary  and  capricious.    See  id.,  at  951–957;  5  U. S. C. 
§706.  On this score, the District Court addressed the Gov-
ernment’s principal justifications for the rule: that failing 
to seek asylum while fleeing through more than one country 
“raises questions about the validity and urgency” of the asy-
lum  seeker’s  claim,  84  Fed.  Reg.  33839;  and  that  Mexico, 
the last port of entry before the United States, offers a fea-
sible alternative for persons seeking protection from perse-
cution, id., at 33835, 33839–33840.  The District Court ex-
amined  the  evidence  in  the  administrative  record  and 
explained why it flatly refuted the Government’s assump-
tions.  385  F. Supp.  3d,  at  951–957.    A  “mountain  of  evi-
dence points one way,” the District Court observed, yet the
Government “went the other—with no explanation.”  Id., at 
955. 

After the District Court issued the injunction, the Ninth
Circuit  declined  the  Government’s  request  for  a  complete 
stay, reasoning that the Government did not make the re-
quired “ ‘strong showing’ ” that it would likely succeed on the 
merits  of  each  issue.    ___  F. 3d  ___  (2019),  2019  WL 
3850928,  *1  (quoting  Hilton  v.  Braunskill,  481  U. S.  770, 
776 (1987)).  Narrowing the injunction to the Circuit’s bor-
ders, the Ninth Circuit expedited the appeal and permitted