SCOTUS Won’t Revive Biden-Era Rule Letting Immigration Judges Put Deportation Cases on Ice

The Supreme Court handed the Trump administration another immigration-related win on Tuesday, declining to revive a Biden-era regulation that allowed immigration judges to temporarily put deportation proceedings on hold.

The one-sentence order in City of Baltimore v. Texas offered no explanation, and no justices publicly dissented. It leaves in place a federal court judgment striking down the regulation nationwide while a separate appeal continues.

[snip]

But there’s a bit more to this story than the Supreme Court’s decidedly brief order.

The dispute centers on a practice known as “administrative closure,” which allows immigration judges to temporarily remove a deportation case from their active docket without actually dismissing it or deciding whether the individual should be removed from the country.

[snip]

Critics, however, argued that the practice could leave deportation cases in litigation limbo indefinitely, effectively allowing individuals who might otherwise be removed to remain in the country.

Enter Texas.

On June 22, 2026, the state sued the Department of Justice (DOJ), challenging the legality of the Biden-era regulation. In a somewhat unusual turn of events, the Trump administration agreed with Texas that the rule was unlawful. And so, that very same day, U.S. District Judge Reed O’Connor approved a consent judgment between the parties, vacating the regulation nationwide and barring the DOJ from enforcing it.

[snip]

They argued that the arrangement between Texas and the Trump administration effectively eliminated an existing federal rule without the usual opportunity for public participation or a meaningful judicial examination of its legality.

O’Connor denied their request to intervene, finding they hadn’t demonstrated the necessary legal standing to join the case. The groups appealed to the 5th Circuit and asked the Supreme Court to temporarily block the Texas judgment while their appeal proceeds, contending that the consent agreement was the product of “egregious collusion.”

[snip]

Now, we should note what the justices didn’t do here: They didn’t issue a ruling declaring administrative closure unconstitutional or definitively resolve whether immigration judges have statutory authority to use the practice. They simply declined to suspend the existing judgment while the challengers pursue their appeal.

[snip]

But for now, the Trump administration’s position prevails; the Biden-era regulation remains vacated, while the fight over who can challenge that outcome continues in the lower courts.

Pretty notable for a Supreme Court order that consists of a single sentence.

(*) Full article: https://redstate.com/smoosieq/2026/10/27/scotus-wont-revive-biden-era-rule-letting-immigration-judges-put-deportation-cases-on-ice-n2208687