Trump v. Cook · ¶79
Whether to issue a stay is fundamentally an equitable determination. Fairness concerns compel courts to ask, in essence, whether a stay applicant “can be made to wait until the conclusion of the litigation to vindicate their purported legal rights, or whether irreparable harm will befall the applicant in the interim such that the court must act early to stave off that damage, for equity’s sake.” Noem v. Doe, 605 U. S. ＿＿＿, ＿＿＿ (2025) (JACKSON, J., dissenting from grant of application for stay) (slip op., at 3). Because the authority to grant a stay is “justified by the perceived need ‘to prevent irreparable injury to the parties or to the public’ pending review,” Nken v. Holder, 556 U. S. 418, 432 (2009) (quoting Scripps-Howard Radio, Inc. v. FCC, 316 U. S. 4, 9 (1942)), the most important considerations are “whether the applicant will suffer irreparable harm absent emergency…Read in context ›
slip opinion
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.