237 F. Supp. 3d 13
D.D.C.2017Background
- Plaintiff is a Venezuelan national residing in South Carolina and a University of South Carolina student.
- Plaintiff filed a Petition for Writ of Mandamus and Complaint for Declaratory Judgment seeking asylum adjudication (Form I-589) he alleges was received June 9, 2016.
- Plaintiff sought a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction (TRO/PI) to compel adjudication of his asylum application.
- Court applies the four-factor standard for TRO/PI and may apply a sliding scale balancing; irreparable harm must be demonstrated.
- Court finds the motion lacks specificity and authority to restrain the President, and denies the TRO/PI.
- A separate order will issue denying the motion.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether TRO/PI standard applies and irreparable harm shown | Narvaez Gomez suffers irreparable harm from government inaction | No actionable basis to restrain executive actions or social-media posts | Motion denied for lack of adequate irreparable-harm showing and basis for relief |
| Whether plaintiff can enjoin the President from social-media communication | Requests relief against presidential communications | Courts cannot enjoin presidential speech or actions | Denied; relief not permissible against the President |
| Whether four-factor standard supports TRO/PI here | Strong likelihood of merit and irreparable harm | Factors not satisfied; relief inappropriate | Denied; motion devoid of necessary facts to fashion relief |
Key Cases Cited
- Chaplaincy of Full Gospel Churches v. England, 454 F.3d 290 (D.C. Cir. 2006) (four-factor standard applies; sliding scale allowed)
- Hall v. Johnson, 599 F. Supp. 2d 1 (D.D.C. 2009) (same standard for TRO and preliminary injunction)
- Winter v. Nat. Res. Def. Council, Inc., 555 U.S. 7 (Supreme Court 2008) (irreparable harm required for injunctions)
- CityFed Fin. Corp. v. Off. of Thrift Supervision, 58 F.3d 738 (D.C. Cir. 1995) (requires at least some injury to justify preliminary relief)
- Sampson v. Murray, 415 U.S. 61 (Supreme Court 1974) (irreparable harm historically central to injunctive relief)
- Abdullah v. Bush, 945 F. Supp. 2d 64 (D.D.C. 2013) (injunctions against executive actions require careful tailoring)
- Abdullah v. Obama, 753 F.3d 193 (D.C. Cir. 2014) (affirmation of limits on injunctive relief against the President)
- CSX Transp., Inc. v. Williams, 406 F.3d 667 (D.C. Cir. 2005) (sliding-scale considerations in injunctive relief)