Case Explained: DORCAS INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF RHODE ISLAND; REFUGEE DREAM CENTER; SERVICE EMPLOYEES INTERNATIONAL UNION; INTERNATIONAL UNION UNITED AUTOMOBILE, AEROSPACE AND AGRICULTURAL IMPLEMENT WORKERS OF AMERICA; AFRICAN COMMUNITIES TOGETHER; VENEZUELAN ASSOCIATION OF MASSACHUSETTS; PARTNERSHIP FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF NEW AMERICANS; AMERICAN GATEWAYS v. UNITED STATED CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION SERVICES; JOSEPH EDLOW, in the official capacity as Director of the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services; DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY; MARKWAYNE MULLIN, in the official capacity as Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security Before Montecalvo, Aframe, and Dunlap Circuit Judges

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit Filed: 2026-08-14 The First Circuit granted the government’s emergency motion for a stay pending appeal in part, but denied it in part regarding a Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(b) partial final judgment entered by the district court in favor of plaintiffs challenging three immigration policies under the Administrative Procedure Act. The court applied the four-factor test established in *Nken v. Holder*, which requires a strong showing of likelihood of success on the merits, irreparable injury absent a stay, substantial injury to other parties, and consideration of the public interest. After reviewing the government’s arguments regarding agency action, finality, and ripeness, the court concluded that the government failed to meet its burden for two of the challenged policies but succeeded in demonstrating entitlement to a stay only for the “Comprehensive Re-Review Policy,” which directs USCIS personnel to re-review approved benefit requests for aliens from certain countries who entered the United States on or after January 20, 2021. Consequently, the stay is limited exclusively to that specific policy, while the district court’s judgment regarding the other two policies remains in effect and the government’s request for a broader stay is denied. Do It For The Case Law is a news reporting service. Nothing in this episode constitutes legal advice.