From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Trump v. Hawaii

Supreme Court of the United States
Oct 24, 2017
138 S. Ct. 377 (2017)

Summary

holding that an appeal no longer presented a "live case or controversy" because the provisions of the challenged order "expired by [their] own terms"

Summary of this case from Health Freedom Def. Fund v. President of the United States

Opinion

No. 16–1540.

10-24-2017

Donald J. TRUMP, President of the United States, et al., petitioners, v. HAWAII, et al.


We granted certiorari in this case to resolve a challenge to the temporary suspension of entry of aliens and refugees under Section 2(c) and Section 6 of Executive Order No. 13,780. Because those provisions of the Order have "expired by [their] own terms." the appeal no longer presents a "live case or controversy." Burke v. Barnes, 479 U.S. 361, 363, 107 S.Ct. 734, 93 L.Ed.2d 732 (1987). Following our established practice in such cases, the judgment is therefore vacated, and the case is remanded to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit with instructions to dismiss as moot the challenge to Executive Order No. 13,780. United States v. Munsingwear, Inc. 340 U.S. 36, 39, 71 S.Ct. 104, 95 L.Ed. 36 (1950). We express no view on the merits.

Justice SOTOMAYOR dissents from the order vacating the judgment below and would dismiss the writ of certiorari as improvidently granted.


Summaries of

Trump v. Hawaii

Supreme Court of the United States
Oct 24, 2017
138 S. Ct. 377 (2017)

holding that an appeal no longer presented a "live case or controversy" because the provisions of the challenged order "expired by [their] own terms"

Summary of this case from Health Freedom Def. Fund v. President of the United States

holding the appeal was moot because provisions of the challenged executive order "expired by [their] own terms"

Summary of this case from League of Conservation Voters v. Biden

recognizing that, because the contested orders suspending entry of aliens and refugees had “expired by their own terms the appeal no longer present[ed] a live case or controversy” (alteration and internal quotation marks omitted)

Summary of this case from Magnate, LLC v. United States Envtl. Prot. Agency

dismissing as moot a challenge to an executive order's provisions that had "expired by [their] own terms"

Summary of this case from Snider v. Cain

remanding to the Ninth Circuit with instructions to dismiss as moot the challenge to Executive Order No. 13,780 ("EO-2") in Hawaii v. Trump, 859 F.3d 741 (9th Cir. 2017) ("Hawaii I") and "express[ing] no view on the merits"

Summary of this case from Doe v. Trump
Case details for

Trump v. Hawaii

Case Details

Full title:Donald J. TRUMP, President of the United States, et al., petitioners, v…

Court:Supreme Court of the United States

Date published: Oct 24, 2017

Citations

138 S. Ct. 377 (2017)
199 L. Ed. 2d 275

Citing Cases

Pletcher v. Giant Eagle, Inc.

(quoting Knox v. Serv. Emps., 567 U.S. 298, 132 S.Ct. 2277, 2287, 183 L.Ed.2d 281 (2012)); see also N.Y.…

Wood v. Palace Entm't

See, e.g., Campbell-Ewald Co. v. Gomez, 577 U.S. 153, 161, 136 S.Ct. 663, 193 L.Ed.2d 571 (2016) (quoting…