Be honest. The government made a lousy case.
The Government has not shown that a stay is necessary to avoid irreparable injury. [Nken, 556 U.S. at 434.]
Although we agree that “the Government’s interest in combating terrorism is an urgent objective of the highest order,”
[Holder v. Humanitarian Law Project, 561 U.S. 1, 28 (2010)], the Government has done little more than reiterate that fact.
Despite the district court’s and our own repeated invitations to explain the urgent need for the Executive Order to be
placed immediately into effect, the Government submitted no evidence to rebut the States’ argument that the district
court’s order merely returned the nation temporarily to the position it has occupied for many previous years.
The Government has pointed to no evidence that any alien from any of the countries named in the Order has
perpetrated a terrorist attack in the United States. Rather than present evidence to explain the need for the Executive
Order, the Government has taken the position that we must not review its decision at all.
We disagree, as explained above.