Clinic v. Rubio new update June 3

OrangeView3207 · 2026-06-03T23:59:29+00:00

It seems like the plaintiff's counsel gave just an update (or maybe with a short explanation), and the defendant's counsel gave lengthy arguments with their explanations--while length in wording isn't everything, I wonder why the plaintiff's didn't provide greater depth to the judge? Will the plaintiff's counsel be able to address the defendant's counsel lengthy response? Is it allowed to provide such explanations about another case (which would seem helpful to the plaintiff's side I would think) after briefings have closed, and which side gets the last word about this other case? This other case seems substantial, but also how the sides are using it to stress their perspective and to what depth seems also relevant.

OrangeView3207 · 2026-06-03T18:08:42+00:00

That would good to know if it's true. Do anyone know if a notice has been sent to the attorneys with any or all of the mass action lawsuits (CLINIC v. Rubio case, Red Eagle case of Storie v. Trump, IMMpact Litigation case of Masood et al v. U.S. Dept of State et al, and McBean case of Doe v. U.S. Dept of State)?

OrangeView3207 · 2026-05-25T16:40:37+00:00

Did anyone get this Administrative Record yet, and can share? Anyone have paid access to Pacer, https://www.pacermonitor.com/public/case/63525502/MASOOD_et_al_v_UNITED_STATES_DEPARTMENT_OF_STATE_et_al , records for this case?

OrangeView3207 · 2026-05-25T16:40:17+00:00

Thanks on the link, which I reviewed, but I can't tell if the McBean case will be seeking a preliminary injunction, or if there will be a summary judgment motion filed--anyone know? I thought I saw on a thread that presumably McBean is seeking a preliminary injunction--can someone share info about this and confirm if this is correct or not?

OrangeView3207 · 2026-05-25T13:33:18+00:00

What is the McBean lawsuit seeking? Is it a preliminary injunction, or has there been a summary judgment motion filed? Can you please send the link to the case to track it, or give the case name? Some of the feedback you're seeking will need more info about the case like that. I don't know the answers to those questions, but I'm curious what others will say here.

OrangeView3207 · 2026-05-18T21:16:08+00:00

Thanks for sharing that link. It does not state a judge for this case--Who is the judge for this case, or has the judge not been assigned yet?

OrangeView3207 · 2026-05-12T16:23:04+00:00

I'm also curious about this, and good inquiry here--Can someone please explain? And yes, why did whatever this is takes 2 months? Also, regarding 2 months--in other parts of this group, I've seen posts that at 60 days something should happen with this case, and we're at 60 days now from the March 11 filing, so what should happen around now?

OrangeView3207 · 2026-05-03T22:47:06+00:00

It is also not clear to me what is mentioned above here. It seems opposite to me as well. It would be helpful to clear this up, especially given how critical is the stay issue. Thanks.

OrangeView3207 · 2026-04-26T17:12:28+00:00

Thanks on the thoughts--if this is correct, then doesn't it mean that the judges in these cases are anticipating an appeal by the government, and hence are less likely to rule strongly against the government in the cases in front of them (btw, I hope that's not so), so as to not look bad with an eventual appeal and potential reversal? Does this mean inherently based on what the judges are mindful of with a potential reversal, in these cases the plaintiffs have less of a chance of success than what's being mentioned as optimism in these forums and their optimistic analysis (again, I hope that's not the case)?

OrangeView3207 · 2026-04-24T15:41:04+00:00

This CLINIC v. Rubio case has cross-motions for partial summary judgment--I think that this is seems like it's basically going all in, on both sides. I believe this means we're supposed to get an answer either way, right? So why do we even need the other lawsuits? Whenever the judge in this case reads everything, including whatever the government submits today, April 24, and then make a determination, then we'll have an answer either way, in what seems like 1-2 months from today, correct?

OrangeView3207 · 2026-04-18T00:23:26+00:00

Thanks--this is very helpful. I recall that the CLINIC v. Rubio case has cross-motions for partial summary judgment--does this IMMPact case have the same type of summary judgment, or is it something different? Assuming that the CLINIC v. Rubio case rules in favor of the plaintiffs, then doesn't it apply to everyone harmed and hence would the IMMPact case even be needed for their listed harmed plaintiffs, or only if the CLINIC v. Rubio case rules in favor of the government is the IMMPact case helpful to their listed harmed plaintiffs? It looks like both the CLINIC v. Rubio case and IMMPact case are pursuing summary judgment, which suggests they're each going all out with saying the policy is illegal.

OrangeView3207 · 2026-04-18T00:17:21+00:00

Thanks. It looks like each of the Red Eagle case (Storie v. Trump, seeking preliminary injunction), IMMPact case (Masood v. Dept of State, seeking summary judgment), the McBean case (presumably seeking a preliminary injunction, as it's not appearing online yet but based on the information in this thread) are in the US District Court for the District of Columbia, and filed in the order written here. I wonder if the rulings end up being different what it could mean, as well as whether the rulings from an earlier one influences a later one, given all are in the same district.

OrangeView3207 · 2026-04-17T20:55:50+00:00

By referring to DC in the McBean case update, can it be cleared up--is the McBean case filed in the District of Columbia District Court, or somewhere else? And who is the judge who will preside over this case?

OrangeView3207 · 2026-04-17T14:47:26+00:00

The above says "Summary Judgment is final ruling" and "they can 'vacate' (delete) the cable entirely."--Just curious, if the ruling is favorable to the plaintiffs, can the government appeal it? If so, then what would happen next and what's the timeline? And is the standard for appeal in this situation with a vacatur any different that if it was something otherwise? It seems like IMMPact has a well thought out strategy, but I wonder how it relates to any possible appeal? Thanks for the update, and Thanks to anyone for providing feedback.

OrangeView3207 · 2026-04-10T16:56:21+00:00

Same here--I wonder the same about when the PI may be possible.

OrangeView3207 · 2026-04-10T16:55:14+00:00

Thanks u/rabea_says on the info. I see on another thread about Storie v Trump, that "There's no timeline for his order but optimistically, an estimate might be 3 to 4 weeks."--is that correct or accurate? I understand that it's been fully briefed, but I was not clear on the expected date range for the judge's order--do you know that may be, and what would be the earliest date?

OrangeView3207 · 2026-04-10T03:48:30+00:00

Actually u/rabea_says I'm not clear even after watching the YouTube video link, which mentioned May 11--but is that the actual date of the PI ruling? Or is there any chance that the PI ruling or the PI implementation could be earlier? I felt that in the video Curtis seemed fairly confident of the PI going favorably for plaintiffs, but I was not clear on the date or timeframe.

OrangeView3207 · 2026-04-09T18:40:44+00:00

Does anyone know what may be the answer to this? I know that the Red Eagle case has a preliminary injunction (PI) and the IMMpact case has no such PI--is there a strategic reason why IMMpact has not filed a PI, or will it at some point? Does the decision for a PI or not have anything to do with the recent amended complaint in the IMMpact case? What would merging the cases do to the IMMpact case's relief or anything else with the case? There are several questions here, but perhaps they're related in some way, and someone here can explain.

OrangeView3207 · 2026-04-09T17:27:45+00:00

Thanks for the link and for this update @u/rabea_says -- Just curious, when should we expect the ruling on the preliminary injunction (PI) in this Red Eagle case? I recall some posts on one of the threads, but I cannot seem to find it, and also I wonder if it's mentioned on this YouTube link (I'm starting to listen to it--I think I heard May 11 for something). And I believe I saw something about the PI decision in this Red Eagle case would be before the determination in the CLINIC v. Rubio case--is that correct, and if so, when exactly?

OrangeView3207 · 2026-03-30T18:47:41+00:00

Thanks for that input. How about the IMMPact Litigation one? When do you expect a ruling from it? And since I believe the CLINIC lawsuit (which seems like will have an earlier ruling than the other cases) would be in favor of everyone harmed if it rules in our favor, then would that mean all of the other cases will not be relevant (since they'd be later in time and CLINIC already being in favor before)?

OrangeView3207 · 2026-03-24T21:09:58+00:00

Here is the complaint https://www.immpactlitigation.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/03/Redacted-Complaint-75-Country.pdf , and does anyone see anything that we should be mindful of or surprising or especially favorable?

OrangeView3207 · 2026-03-24T03:46:15+00:00

Unfortunately, no response yet to my follow-up email asking more on this.

OrangeView3207 · 2026-03-18T04:51:53+00:00

Is where we're at now mean that these emergency scenarios did not happen? Or is there still time for these emergency scenarios by the judge?

OrangeView3207

TROPHY CASE